anne power and katharine mumford - jrf · anne power and katharine mumford. the joseph rowntree...

The slow death of great cities?Urban abandonment or urban renaissance

Anne Power and Katharine Mumford

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has supported this project as part of its programme ofresearch and innovative development projects, which it hopes will be of value to policymakers and practitioners. The facts presented and views expressed in this report are,however, those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Foundation.

Joseph Rowntree Foundation 1999

All rights reserved.

Published for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation by YPS

ISBN 1 902633 11 3

Cover design by Adkins Design

Prepared and printed by:York Publishing Services Ltd64 Hallfield RoadLayerthorpeYork YO31 7ZQ

Photographs are Anthony Lee (LSE Housing) and Katharine Mumford

The flyer on page 34 is reproduced courtesy of City of Newcastle upon Tyne Housing Department;the photographs on page 79 are reproduced courtesy of Urban Splash; Appendix 6 is reproducedcourtesy of Manchester City Council.

Contents

Page

Acknowledgements vi

Definitions vii

Executive summary ix

1 Introduction – urban abandonment or urban renaissance? 1

Part I Trends in two cities and four neighbourhoods 3

2 Method and approach 5

3 Changes in the two cities and four neighbourhoods 8Population 8Density 10Jobs 10

4 Social dynamics 13Deprivation 13Concentrated deprivation 14Ethnic composition 15Crime 15

5 Housing patterns – how problematic are they? 17Tenure 17Changing housing patterns 18Housing types 20

Part II Evidence of incipient abandonment 23

6 Urban abandonment 25Empty property 25Demolition 28Pace of abandonment 28Property values 29Turnover and access to council housing 30Waiting lists 31Housing associations 35Private landlords 35Schools 37

Part III The story of four neighbourhoods 43

7 Bankside 45About the area 45How/when it hit trouble 45Inputs/impacts 46Current options 48

8 City-Edge 49About the area 49How/when it hit trouble 49Inputs/impacts 50Current options 52

9 Riverview 54About the area 54How/when it hit trouble 54Inputs/impacts 56Current options 58

10 Valleyside 59About the area 59How/when it hit trouble 59Inputs/impacts 60Current options 62

Part IV The causes and consequences of decline 65

11 The long roots of the problem – history not news 67Pre-World War I 67Inter-war years 67Post-World War II 67Urban depopulation 68Severed networks 68Surplus estates 69Estate management 69Bias to renovation 70Global shifts 70The break-up of ‘municipal fiefdoms’ 70Rescuing estates 71The numbers game 71

12 Driving factors 73Reputation 74Housing and environmental conditions 75Building for a surplus or gentrification? 77Management pressures 77Disrupted communities 80Cumulative crisis 81

Part V A way forward 83

13 What can be done? 85The counter-pressures 85Social exclusion 86Marketing social housing 88Regeneration 92Holding on to residents 94Density 97Household size and formation 98Policing 99Anti-social behaviour 100Young men 100Neighbourhood management or strategic vision? 101

14 Conclusion 104

References 107

Appendix 1: Interviews with local authorities and housing associations around the country 115

Appendix 2: Additional interviews – contributors to low demand 118

Appendix 3: Areas of the country with evidence of pockets of low demand, difficult to let 119properties and high turnover – affecting local authorities and/or housing

associations (not exhaustive)

Appendix 4: Other current research 120

Appendix 5: Schedule of fieldwork interviews 121

Appendix 6: Manchester City Council: corporate aims and objectives 122

Appendix 7: Newcastle’s corporate strategic plan: key extracts 124

Appendix 8: Articles about low demand and abandonment 126

Appendix 9: Local authority stock size, number of difficult to let units, empties, 131demolitions for Manchester and Newcastle

138

Acknowledgements

The debt of thanks we owe to staff and residentsin the cities of Manchester and Newcastle,particularly in the four case study areas, isimmeasurable. We cannot name most of ourlocal collaborators in order to protect theidentity of the areas. We have tried to do justiceto their trust and confidence. Without them, wewould not have understood how serious theproblem of urban abandonment was, nor howintense the commitment to help. We would alsolike to thank Kevin Lavery (Chief Executive),David Butler (Director of Housing), JohnCornhill (Assistant Director), Paul Tanney(Principal Housing Manager), Michael Kerridge(Housing Needs Manager) in Newcastle CityCouncil; and Howard Bernstein (ChiefExecutive), Steve Mycio (Deputy ChiefExecutive (Performance)), Fionnuala Stringer(Principal Team Leader), Clare Tostevin (LowDemand Team Leader) in Manchester CityCouncil. We are also grateful to staff in all theother councils and housing associations who co-operated with our study. We are greatlyindebted to Anthony Lee who helped with thefieldwork interviews and Rebecca Morris whoprepared the report for publication.

We must also thank Mavis McDonald(DETR), Anthony Mayer and Max Steinberg(Housing Corporation), Moira Wallace and LizWalton (Social Exclusion Unit) for their supportin organising three workshops on low demandand unpopular areas. These involved over 100participants from all over the country, giving usmany additional sources of information andideas of what can be done to change conditions.

Finally, we thank Theresa McDonagh, JohnLowe, Richard Best, Alan Holmans, RebeccaTunstall, Ruth Lupton, Ade Kearns, AlanKilburn, Jackie Haq, Chris Power, MikeGahagan, Ivan Turok and Duncan Maclennanwho gave excellent advice and painstakinglyhelped us to draft, correct and recorrect the textof this report. We also want to thank JohnStevens and Barbara Carlisle for their supporton the advisory committee.

We accept full and sole responsibility for anymistakes or misrepresentations in discussingwhat has proved to be a highly topical andtherefore contentious issue.

vi

139

Abandonment describes a house which is emptyand which no one wants to use or live in; alsowhole areas of empty housing – ‘areaabandonment’. ‘Abandonment’ can be causedby the occupier vacating a property withoutgiving any notice, or by the owner, believing theproperty to have zero or negative value.

Brownfield describes land that has alreadybeen used for development. It is usually intowns and cities but airfields, army camps andother previously developed land in villages andthe country, and along roads, railways andcanals are included. Local authorities have atarget of producing 60 per cent of new housingon brownfield sites. Renovation of existingbuildings and change of use (e.g. offices to flats)come within the brownfield category.

Census information in the report is based onofficial Census definitions.

Changing demand implies different groupsseeking access, e.g. singles or families, young orelderly, ethnic minorities or whites. It may resultin housing being used in a different way, e.g.temporary rather than permanent housing.

City council and government information isbased on the definitions in their documents.These are fully referenced.

Difficult to let describes rented housingwhich has above average refusal rates, turnoverand empty property but below average demandor waiting lists. The term was first used in 1976when the then Labour government mounted theinvestigation of difficult to let housing(Burbidge et al., 1981).

General Improvement Areas (GIAs) wereintroduced by the 1969 Housing Act. Run-downinner city areas were designated forconservation through improvement grants toindividual owners and environmental grants to

local authorities to upgrade the area as a whole.They ranged from 300–800 homes. Some weresold off at great profits to owner occupiers.

Gentrification describes the improvement ofdecayed inner city housing through moreaffluent owners buying run-down, olderproperty and doing it up. The term suggestslower income people losing out in the process.

Greenfield describes land that has not beenbuilt on (generally within living memory) orthat bears no sign of construction. Greenfieldhousing developments are exempt from VAT.

Housing Action Areas (HAAs) were set upthrough the 1974 Housing Act. They were aresponse to ‘gentrification’ and combinedcouncil action with bottom-up methods to tackleinner city decline in small areas of around 500properties. Declared areas attracted generousimprovement grants aimed at encouragingresidents to stay. Tenants’ rights wereguaranteed and, where private landlords failedto improve, councils could compulsorilypurchase and renovate.

Inner Urban Areas define the distinct parts ofthe city around the city centre characterised byabove average concentrations of social andeconomic problems. The exact definition variesbut the same areas with similar characteristics,in the same cities, tend to reappear on all indicesand definitions (see DoE, 1996, p. 211).

Low demand describes housing which fewpeople want to move into, or remain living in.The term applies to owner occupied as well asrented housing. It underlines the possibility ofchoice in where people live. It applies to areaswhere overall demand is low relative to supply,suggesting an emerging surplus of housing. Theareas affected can be small neighbourhoods,estates, cities or whole districts. The term is

Definitions

vii

140

The slow death of great cities?

sometimes applied to regions such as the NorthEast or Merseyside.

Negative equity means that a property has alower market value than the outstanding debtthe owner has incurred in buying the property.

New Deal for Communities (NDC) waslaunched in September 1998 as the most recentregeneration programme. It proposesneighbourhood management of up to 4,500homes, co-ordinating health, education, police,training, security, family support and housing.It offers significant capital resources, but alsofunds resident consultation, capacity buildingand long-term support. NDC encouragesinnovative models of ownership, managementand involvement.

Outer Urban Areas are those areas within cityboundaries, further from the centre, with lessconcentrated problems and more attractiveenvironments (see DoE, 1996, p. 211).

Single Regeneration Budget (SRB) broughttogether 20 programmes run through variousgovernment departments. It creates localpartnerships – private/public/statutory/voluntary – to deliver large- and small-scaleregeneration covering environment, security,training, employment, commerce, leisure and, ina minority of cases, housing.

Social exclusion describes the processes which

reduce or limit people’s life chances, resulting insome individuals and groups being unable toparticipate fully in the society in which theylive.

Social Exclusion Unit was set up by the newLabour government in 1997 to co-ordinatedifferent government efforts in tackling theproblems that place some people outside main-stream society. The first three priorities weretruancy and school exclusion, street living andthe most disadvantaged neighbourhoods. Cross-departmental action teams including non-governmental experts are expected to proposenew ‘joined-up’ solutions.

Turnover means the rate of exodus from anarea based on the numbers of householdsleaving as a percentage of all occupied units.

Urban Development Corporations (UDCs) wereestablished by the 1980 Local Government andLand Act. They took over planning powers fromthe local authority for designated inner cityareas with an obsolete industrial, manufacturinginfrastructure. Their aim was to lever in privateinvestment through strong public support tocreate new and refurbished commercial andresidential centres.

Zero demand is housing which no one wants,for which there is no waiting list or marketvalue.

viii

141

Problems

This report examines the experience of fourneighbourhoods within the inner areas of twoNorthern cities that suffer from low demand,incipient abandonment and generaldepopulation. Their problems reflect muchwider trends. Many city neighbourhoodsexperience acute decline and, in the mostextreme cases, abandonment. Layers ofregeneration programmes have made someimprovements but underlying problemscontinue unchanged.

Manchester and Newcastle have declinedover much of this century. Their populationshave dropped as jobs have disappeared.Deprivation is heavily concentrated within thecities, but particularly within the innerneighbourhoods. Large clusters of poverty andunemployment have formed across wide areasinvolving hundreds of thousands ofhouseholds. Concentrated deprivation isregarded as the single biggest factor in areadecline in both cities.

The quality of most housing in the areas isgood, much of it excellent. But abandonment isaffecting all tenures and all property types.Council housing forms the largest tenure in theneighbourhoods but there is significant owneroccupation and some private renting. Housingassociations have been very active in the 1980sand 1990s. Renting dominates and helpsdetermine who lives in the areas. Youngerpeople in work tend to move out to buy.

The four neighbourhoods traditionallyhoused low-income people. The chronic joblosses and the cumulative impact of urbandepopulation have led to empty unwantedproperty becoming a blight on the areas over

the last five years. The value of private propertyhas plummeted in the 1990s, in some cases tozero. Right to Buy sales are far below theaverage for the cities, which in turn are farbelow national levels. Turnover is exceptionallyhigh, making effective management andcommunity stability elusive goals.

Demolition has removed several thousandproperties in the two cities, particularly in theinner neighbourhoods, but numbers of emptyproperties have not declined. In some areas theyhave continued to grow. Whole streets aresometimes abandoned and the areas are dottedwith empty unused spaces. Demolitiondecisions are often a piecemeal reaction tointense problems rather than part of a renewalplan. The blight and uncertainty of demolitionfuel the exodus of those that can.

Schools have been seriously affected. Pupilturnover and falling roles have had a negativeeffect even where schools are performing well.This in turn undermines neighbourhoodcohesion. Crime and disturbance are majorproblems but intensive, proactive policing andcollaboration with residents and local housingmanagers have cut crime and created morepeaceful conditions in some areas.

The main factors associated with acutedecline are: poor reputation and negativehistory; surplus rented housing coupled withdeclining populations; neighbourhoodmanagement problems; disrupted communitieswith weak social controls; acute harassment andanti-social behaviour; a clustering of pressuresprovoking a cumulative crisis.

Low demand is most extensive in councilestates, and there is evidence of falling andchanging demand for social housing in manyareas of the country – in regions of housing

Executive summary

ix

142


shortage as well as surplus. Local authoritiesand housing associations in different regionsreport increasing turnover and numbers ofdifficult to let properties, and changing socialand demographic profiles of applicants.

Prospects

The study uncovered hundreds of projects andprogrammes underway within theneighbourhoods, most of them small scale, in anattempt to hold on to conditions. Without theseinitiatives, social problems would be muchworse. In some cases they are having ameasurable effect. For example, strongenforcement has cut crime; private developershave sold new homes to incomers; residents andhousing staff within small areas have organisedlocal compacts that have increased security,involvement, service quality and stability.

There are many positive new ideas currentlyon trial: a strong pro-urban stance; an array ofinnovative, experimental government initiativestargeted at the most deprived areas; a focus oncommunity and environmental conditions; astrong emphasis on bottom-up approaches,creating many local avenues for inventivenessand using many local levers to prevent a slideinto abandonment; a commitment from the localauthorities to rebuild inner neighbourhoodsafter the devastation left by the collapse in

manufacturing; a re-emphasis on core services,such as schools, police, health; a neighbourhoodmanagement focus; and a determined approachto centre city revitalisation that could spread tothe inner neighbourhoods.

The biggest challenges for cities are:attracting back more people in work on higherincomes and with higher skills; developing theskills and confidence of existing residents andlinking them into new work opportunities;stabilising community conditions andpreventing further exodus; creating strongneighbourhood management structures that canco-ordinate and deliver programmes, enforcebasic conditions and maintain core services;addressing the inner city environment – streetcleaning, refuse, repair, lack of greenery, traffic.

New experimental forms of city regenerationare popular and are attracting more and morenew residents into city centres. The seemingcontradiction between urban abandonment andurban renaissance represents two sides of asingle coin. Inner areas are adjacent tosuccessful new developments in core city areas.Inner city neighbourhoods have many assetsincluding space, infrastructure, proximity, andquality housing. Strong universal underpinningsuch as education, targeted programmes toequalise the poorest areas, and a commitment toexisting residents could unleash the potentialfor inner area regrowth.

x

1

1 Introduction – urban abandonment or

urban renaissance?

Why do some cities and their neighbourhoodsgenerate abandonment, chaos, breakdown at thesame time as they display resilience,experiment, innovation, excitement? Cities havethe brightest lights and the darkest corners,feeding the hopes and fuelling the fears ofmillions. In this report, we examine a nationalproblem of urban decay in the light of theexperience of two great cities suffering acutedecline and four neighbourhoods witnessing thegrowing abandonment of sound property.Managers in the cities we study talk about theabandoned terraces and rejected streets of innerneighbourhoods in terms of death and disease –‘they’re finished’, ‘there’s nothing more we cando’, ‘we can’t save it’, ‘it’s a cancer’, ‘it has togo’, ‘it’s damaging nearby areas’, ‘the voidshave bred’.

Britain ran the largest slum clearanceprogramme in the western world after theSecond World War. Yet, we are contemplatingnew urban clearances. We are demolishingthousands of the very homes we built to replacethose slums.

In every major British city every year –London, Birmingham, Liverpool, Manchester,Newcastle, Glasgow, and many smaller citiesbesides – we are wiping out housing we say weneed. Why? Too few people want to live inurban areas in many parts of the country. Theneighbourhoods that are depopulating mostrapidly create a feeling of lifelessness in spite ofthe efforts of residents and landlords as well asmost other agencies in the city. The abandonedbuildings look like graves; the new railings,lighting, planting, play areas like flowers ongravestones, a lingering farewell to something

loved now lost. The signs of care survive butmany of the people have gone.

Lavishing care on slowing the death of themost difficult urban neighbourhoods is astatement about the future, just as flowers are anaffirmation of hope. It is obvious to an observerthat these areas should not just waste away. Ourstudy reinforces the urgency of the urbanagenda because of the risk that abandonmentand subsequent demolition may spread muchfurther. Unlike human deaths, no one isrecording the numbers, the cause, or the impacton cities as a whole, of neighbourhoodabandonment and renewed demolition.Demolition may be like some ritual bleeding –the more we knock down, the more peoplecontinue to seep away.

This report attempts to do three things –uncover and explain those events that arecombining to cause the abandonment of urbanneighbourhoods; describe the struggle of thoseliving through the experience; uncover andassess attempted remedies and their impact onconditions and trends.

Neither slums nor city decay are inevitable.They are man-made problems. But, if we knewhow to keep poor city neighbourhoods working,our search for the reason why and the way outwould be simple. It is far from simple. We met abarrage of opinions, emotions and evidence ofconflicting trends. The ‘inevitability ofabandonment’, the ‘uncontrollability of decline’at ground level were matched by optimisticpredictions of population growth, job expansionand rebirth at the most senior city hall level.

Most abandoned housing is structurallysound and, in more popular neighbourhoods, it

2


would unquestionably stay up and be worth alot of money. Is demolition inevitable? Ispruning back cities the right approach to allowspace for renewed growth? Or doesgentrification work? The process transforms oldand valueless neighbourhoods into sought-afterareas of rising value through the injection ofinvestment and the attraction of better offpeople. This process rescued the depopulatingslum clearance areas of Islington and turnedthem into some of the most highly prizedLondon neighbourhoods (Ferris, 1972). Can welearn anything from the semi-abandonedGeorgian and Victorian slums we saved fromthe bulldozer 30 years ago?

We found evidence of low demand in theSouth East and South West as well as theMidlands and North. Housing associations arebeginning to encounter letting difficulties, untilrecently found only in local authorities. Owneroccupiers in poor neighbourhoods face long-runnegative equity and devaluation of theirproperty.

Can an urban renaissance work for deprivedneighbourhoods so that the space andopportunity within cities created by long-rundecline generate momentum for rebirth? Thefindings from our research reinforce thepotential for city regrowth.

The report is divided into five parts.

• Part I explains the background andapproach to the study, describing the

main demographic, economic, social andhousing patterns of the cities ofNewcastle, Manchester and fourunpopular neighbourhoods within them.

• Part II presents evidence of acute declineand incipient abandonment in the citiesand neighbourhoods we studied in detail,and in other parts of the country wherewe sought evidence of the problem.

• Part III tells the story of fourcommunities, relying on the directevidence we collected during visits andtalking to around 120 local people livingand working with the problems.

• Part IV looks at the national picture,searching out the origins of our anti-urban trends, the pre- and post-war slumclearance policies we adopted, the widerpressures on cities and our nationaleconomy that fuel polarisation andabandonment, and attempts atregeneration and neighbourhoodrenewal.

• Part V draws together the lessons fromthe detailed study and the widerexperience of urban problems in order touncover and assemble current ideasabout an urban renaissance thatincorporates declining neighbourhoods.

Part I

Trends in two cities and four neighbourhoods

5

2 Method and approach

Our starting points for the report are:

• What drives neighbourhood decline?What are the symptoms? How long has itbeen going on?

• Which neighbourhoods experience acutedecline? How widespread is thephenomenon?

• What measures are taken to prevent andcure the problems? Which ones work?Can neighbourhoods recover? Are someneighbourhoods doomed?

• What is the bigger picture? How do theworst areas fit into the general pattern ofcity and regional change?

Our work draws on two earlier studiesfunded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation:Swimming against the Tide, a study of the 20 mostdifficult council estates over 15 years, andDangerous Disorder, a study of 13 unpopularareas experiencing disorder and rioting in theearly 1990s (Power and Tunstall, 1995, 1997).Both studies included Newcastle and GreaterManchester, but also covered much wider areasof the country. Many of the most unpopularestates were in London. In addition, we draw onthe history of council housing (Power, 1987),two studies of European social housing (Power,1995, 1997), and earlier work for the Departmentof Environment Priority Estates Projectconcerning unpopular areas in England andWales (1979–89). We collected evidence of lowdemand from many parts of the country in thecourse of the work (see Appendices 1–3).

Our main focus is on Manchester andNewcastle, two cities experiencing long-rundecline. Like other large cities, they are

adversely hit both by the loss of key industriesand by more general anti-urban trends. Wechoose these cities because the problems areclear, the impacts visible and the changesdramatic. The North is suffering most from theproblems we are exploring. But we link ourfindings to the more general urban experienceof low demand and exodus from certainneighbourhoods, coupled with changingdemand for social housing.

We examine two neighbourhoods in eachcity. One shows acute symptoms ofabandonment – streets with a majority of housesempty; demolition sites scattered throughoutthe area; empty property across theneighbourhood; property values falling; andintense demand problems in all property types,all tenures and all parts of the neighbourhood.The second neighbourhood is likewise inserious difficulty. But conditions generally havenot plummeted to such a low point and there ismore ground for hope that the situation can bestabilised or reversed. Each neighbourhoodcontains between 3,600 and 4,900 households,and represents either a single ward or adjacentparts of several wards. This size enabled us tocover all tenures and all services, but was smallenough to understand in depth. Each ward waswithin a much larger, deprived area.

By adopting this approach, we aim tounderstand the problem on three levels – acuteproblems at city level; extreme problems atneighbourhood level; complete abandonment inthe very worst pockets of the most difficultareas. The problems of these cities andneighbourhoods are not unique, but extreme,openly acknowledged. Their long roots aretherefore traceable; also vigorous attempts arebeing made to do something about them. Thus,

6


we can begin to understand the steepness of thedecline; the political and community responses;and the potential for change.

We do not identify the neighbourhoods toavoid further negative images, though weacknowledge the invaluable help of many front-line staff and residents in the four areas. Whenreporting neighbourhood conditions, wenumber them M1, M2, N3, N4; M1 and M2 arein Manchester, N3 and N4 are in Newcastle.Those familiar with the actual scenes wedescribe will possibly recognise the specificareas, but their existing knowledge of theproblems prevents further damage resultingfrom our work. Those concerned about thegeneral problems of low demand and anxious tounderstand more fully what is going on do notneed the exact location or names in order toappreciate the situation facing theseneighbourhoods. The neighbourhoods sharemany characteristics with unpopular anddifficult to manage urban areas all over thecountry, including in high demand cities likeLondon. There is an intense hierarchy ofpopular and unpopular areas. The least popularsuffer high levels of empty property, highturnover with some abandonment anddemolition because of low demand (HackneyBorough Council, 1992; Southwark Council,1994; Power and Tunstall, 1995).

It is possible to draw a broad distinctionbetween low demand in economicallyprosperous cities and regions such as the SouthEast and low demand in cities and regionssuffering long-term structural decline such asthe North. Throughout the report we make thisdistinction, although earlier work and researchoutside the North for this study suggestcommon patterns and pressures within cities

(DoE, 1981a). Our contention is that theeconomic decline, population loss and incipientabandonment evidenced in the North are amore extreme and therefore more visiblemanifestation of a wider process. Thephenomenon also exists in most NorthernEuropean countries, though with distinctcontinental features and in different degrees(Caisse des Depots, 1998).

We drew on academic research in progresson this subject (Housing Corporation, 1997;Bramley, 1998; CIoH, 1998) and governmentresearch as well as earlier work (see Appendix 4for full list).

We spoke to 104 staff in the followingservices: estate agents, voluntary bodies, shops,senior town hall officials, housing, regeneration,education, police, community work, socialservices, councillors and housing associations.We met with 24 residents’ representatives in thefour areas. Where possible, we met one seniorand one front-line representative for each mainservice in each area (see Appendix 5 forbreakdown by service). In addition, weinterviewed local staff in other similarneighbourhoods. We spoke to a further 33people across the country including chiefexecutives, directors of housing and second tierofficers.

Our aim in working close to the ground wasto ‘get under the skin of the problem’. In orderto understand neighbourhood problems as fullyas possible, we relied on four principal methodsbased on our experience of earlierneighbourhood investigations:

• direct observation of conditions andchanges in conditions over time in theneighbourhoods

7

Method and approach

• direct interviews with the residents andstaff living and working in a situation ofacute decline

• collation of available facts on the areasfrom as wide a range of sources aspossible including the Census, councilreports and monitoring, governmentrecords and other research in the field

• interviews with senior officialsresponsible for neighbourhood strategiesand interventions.

In addition, we collected press reports andlocal newsletters; we took photographs of theareas; we wrote observation notes immediatelyafter every visit; we recorded and wrote upinterviews; we documented empty sites andproperty; we mapped the smallerneighbourhoods within each area showing thetenure, the location of services, level ofabandonment, progression of neighbourhood

emptying and changes to buildings.We had not expected the problem to move so

fast that, over the 16 months of our study, wewould witness directly visible changes.However, there was a rapid progression overthis short period both in the manifestation of theproblem itself and in the approach to theproblem by the cities. The people we spoke toleft us with an urgent sense that their struggle tosurvive in such a vortex had been ‘kept quiet fortoo long’. Therefore, whenever possible, we usetheir own words to convey the full force ofevents and to illustrate the issues we foundwider evidence to support. No individual quoteis directly attributed, but we make it clear whichsource we are using. We use individualquotations to support wider evidence, not asevidence in itself. We tried to avoid bias bychecking all the case studies and quotationswith local sources.

8

3 Changes in the two cities and four

neighbourhoods

Below, we present demographic and economicevidence, comparing Manchester and Newcastlewith the national picture. Where possible, weshow comparable trends in the fourneighbourhoods.

Population

Newcastle and Manchester were both muchlarger cities at the turn of the century than today(Halsey, 1988). Both have continued to losepopulation into the 1990s, but the rate of losshas slowed down and may stabilise or evenreverse over the next few years. People inemployment have moved out faster and furtherthan jobs (DoE, 1996). Table 1 shows thepopulation trend.

Outer areas have been depopulating too,though more slowly than inner areas. Table 2shows this.

Table 3 shows the greater population lossesin the four neighbourhoods.

The two Manchester neighbourhoods lostover one-third of their populations in the 1970sbecause of slum clearance. The Newcastleneighbourhoods experienced continuousserious decline over the whole period. Thechanges result in a fairly static supply of housesalongside declining population.

In spite of acute population losses, thenumber of households grew in both citiesbetween 1981 and 1991 – by 3 per cent inManchester and 6 per cent in Newcastle. Tosome extent, household formation is

Table 1 Population of cities of Manchester and Newcastle, 1971–96

Year Manchester1 % change Newcastle2 % change

1971 553,600 299,6641981 462,600 269,2331971–81 –16 –10

1991 438,500 255,9851981–91 –5 –5

1996 430,800 251,8001991–96 –2 –2

Population loss1971–96 –122,800 –22 –47,864 –16

Source: Manchester Committee Report, 30 May 1996; Manchester’s 1996 Local Census; NewcastleCity Profiles, 1997.

1 The figures for Manchester show the mid-year estimates prepared by the Registrar General inorder to overcome the problem of the 1991 Census having largely excluded students.

2 The figures for Newcastle represent the private household population and exclude the institutionalpopulation. Newcastle City Council found that the mid-year estimate for 1996 over-compensatedfor under-enumeration in the 1991 Census, so Newcastle’s own figures, based on their 1996 inter-censal survey together with the 1971, 1981 and 1991 Censuses, have been used here.

9

Changes in the two cities and four neighbourhoods

encouraged by available space. But, in the twoNewcastle neighbourhoods, the absolutenumber of households shrank, suggestingextreme low demand.

Table 4 shows changes in the number ofhouseholds in two cities and fourneighbourhoods between 1981 and 1991.

Table 2 Population change in inner and outer areas

of Manchester and Newcastle, 1971–91 (%)

Manchester Newcastle

1971–81Inner –19 –21Outer –17 –7

1981–91Inner –10 –8Outer –2 –3

Source: Urban Trends in England (DoE, 1996, p. 24).

Table 3 Population change in four inner areas and two cities, 1971–96 (%)

Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

1971–81 –16 –10 –39 –39 –13 –151981–91 –5 –5 –5 –8 –19 –211991–96 –2 –2 –6 –7 –20 –10

Sources: 1981 and 1991 Census; Newcastle City Profiles, 1997; Manchester’s 1996 Local Census.

Table 4 Changes in the number of households in two cities and four neighbourhoods, 1981–91 (%)

Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

1981–91 +3 +6 +13 +3 –5 –9

Sources: Manchester Committee Report, 30 May 1996, based on the 1991 Census; Newcastle CityProfiles, 1997, based on the 1991 Census.

Table 5 Population densities (residents per hectare)

Location Neighbourhoods

Great Britain 2.4England 3.6Inner London 78.1Greater London 42.3Birmingham 36.2Glasgow 33.1Manchester 34.9 M1 31 M2 37Newcastle 23.2 N3 44 N4 42

Source: 1991 Census.

10


Table 6 Declining population of conurbations in thousands

2001Region 1961 1971 1981 1991 (projected)

Greater Manchester 2,710 2,750 2,619 2,571 2,560Tyne and Wear 1,241 1,218 1,155 1,130 1,114Merseyside 1,711 1,662 1,522 1,450 1,386Greater London 7,977 7,529 6,806 6,890 7,215

Sources: Annual Abstract of Statistics, 1998; PPI population estimates, 1998; 1996 based sub-nationalprojection (PP3 98/1).

Density

Both cities have low population densities, lessthan half the density of inner London. While theoverall population density of Britain is amongthe highest in Europe, urban densities generallyare low (Economist, 1998). Paris, Madrid, Rome,Berlin are visibly more densely built up thanLondon, for example. Table 5 shows the numberof residents per hectare in the two cities andfour neighbourhoods in comparison with othercities and nationally.

Table 6 highlights the long-running declineof urban areas leading to ever lower densitieswithin the main cities of England. The Office ofNational Statistics (ONS) expects the overalldecline of conurbations to continue, with theexception of Greater London, based on the 1996population figures (ONS, 1998).

Jobs

The population and density changes are mirroredby job changes. The figures comparing 1984 and1991 show that jobs in inner areas continued todisappear while jobs in the outer areas grew. Inouter Manchester, jobs expanded by 41 per cent.Table 7 shows this. The increase in outer city jobscontrasts with outer population decline.

The pattern of jobs has changed radicallywith the losses heavily concentrated amongmale workers and the gains among females.Table 8 shows this.

The starkest losses were in manufacturing,as shown in Table 9.

The surprisingly large increase in publicservice jobs in Newcastle may be due in part tospecific boundaries, to the relocation ofgovernment offices to Newcastle, and to the factthat the definition of ‘public services’ includeshealth care provided by the private sector, forexample. Manchester City lost public servicejobs, whilst the rest of the Greater Manchesterconurbation gained 55,000 (an increase of 44 percent) (Turok and Edge, forthcoming).

The proportion of the populationunemployed (registered for work but without ajob) was more than double the national averagein the two cities, but much higher in the fourinner areas than in the cities as a whole. Table 10shows the unemployment rates between 1991and 1996/97. Unemployment droppedsignificantly over the five years from 1991 in thetwo Manchester areas but rose in the Newcastleareas. Mirroring the general job changes,unemployment dropped far more rapidly forwomen than for men.

11

Changes in the two cities and four neighbourhoods

Table 7 Employment change in Manchester and

Newcastle, 1984–91 (% total jobs)

Manchester Newcastle

Inner –6 –7Outer +41 +9

Source: Urban Trends in England (DoE, 1996,p. 44).

Table 8 Employment change for male and female

workers in inner and outer areas of Manchester and

Newcastle, 1984–91 (as a % of full-time equivalents)

Manchester NewcastleMale Female Male Female

Inner –13 +1 –19 +4Outer* +25 +54 –1 +14

Source: Urban Trends in England (DoE, 1996,p. 44).

* Outer Manchester is a small proportion of thecity as a whole, making the % changes moreextreme

Table 9 Changes in sector of employment in the cities of Manchester and Newcastle, 1981–96

Great Britain (%) Manchester (%) Newcastle (%)

Manufacturing –1,950,000 (–33) –38,600 (–62) –12,700 (–42)Private services +2,899,000 (+35) –2,750 (–2) +1,200 (+1)Public services + 988,000 (+22) –5,250 (–7) +14,500 (+35)

Sources: Annual Employment Survey/Census of Employment; Turok and Edge (forthcoming).

Notes: See notes at end of Chapter 3.

Table 10 Male and female unemployment rate, 1991–96/97 (%)

Nationally Manchester Newcastle1 M1 M2 N3 N4

19911 Male 11 23 19 29 32 35 38Female 7 14 10 19 16 18 19

19972 Male 8 17 21* 19 23 39* 43*Female 3 6 9* 5 5 13* 16*

Sources: Newcastle City Profiles, 1991; Newcastle City Profiles, 1996; Social Trends, 1998; ManchesterWard Profiles, 1991; Manchester Matters, 1997; Census, 1991.

1 1991 figures represent Census unemployment rates. Newcastle’s 1996 (*) figures are also based onCensus unemployment rates.

2 1997 figures are based on the Office of National Statistics claimant counts. This may lower theManchester figures.

The proportion of the working agepopulation not in work or studying is far higherin both cities and nationally than the recordedunemployment rate; in the four inner areasalmost half the population of working age isoutside the labour market and education (seeTable 11). This problem has got worse.

12


Table 11 Percentage of working age population not in work or studying or training, 1991

National Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

24 37 31 46 48 49 50

Source: 1991 Census.

Notes to Table 9

• These figures treat full-time jobs asequivalent to part-time posts, therebyignoring the shift from the former to thelatter.

• The Annual Employment Survey/Censusof Employment does not record self-employment, which increased over theperiod.

• Manchester and Newcastle are defined asthe City Council areas in both cases, notwider conurbations whose definition ismore ambiguous. The outer conurbationsof most cities performed better than thecores over the period 1981–96(interestingly, Leeds and Newcastle werethe two exceptions).

• Occupational data (e.g. manual/non-manual) are available only from theCensus of Population. Considerablemanipulation is required to identify thechanges between 1981 and 1991 sincedefinitions changed over this period.However, the bulk of manual jobs tend tobe in manufacturing industry, so itsdecline is a good indicator of the loss ofmanual jobs. Some manual jobs are alsofound in two service sectors: (i)distribution, hotels and catering (mainlyunskilled); and (ii) transport andcommunications (mainly skilled). Bothsectors declined in Newcastle between1981–96. Distribution, etc. also declined inManchester, but transport andcommunications expanded slightly.

Source: Ivan Turok.

13

4 Social dynamics

In the following sections, we examine some ofthe social problems common to urban areas.

Deprivation

Based on the Government’s new index of localdeprivation (DETR, 1998a), Manchester ranks asthe third most deprived area in England andNewcastle 19th, out of 354. AlthoughManchester scores higher on most indicatorsthan Newcastle, both score higher than all theirsurrounding authorities. Table 12 shows this.

Table 12 Degree of deprivation on 12 indicators in

local authorities around Greater Manchester and

Tyneside

Degree of deprivationDeprivation Rank among

Authority score local authorities

Manchester 36.33 3Salford 26.64 23Rochdale 25.13 29Oldham 24.82 33Bolton 20.66 47Tameside 19.78 53Trafford 7.42 129Stockport 3.81 177

Newcastle 27.95 19Sunderland 26.90 21Gateshead 24.58 35South Tyneside 23.67 38North Tyneside 18.67 62

Source: DETR, 1998a.

Table 13 The top 20 local authorities on the

government’s new index of deprivation in rank

order

Area Score

1 Liverpool 40.072 Newham 38.553 Manchester 36.334 Hackney 35.215 Birmingham 34.676 Tower Hamlets 34.307 Sandwell 33.788 Southwark 33.749 Knowsley 33.6910 Islington 32.2111 Greenwich 31.5812 Lambeth 31.5713 Haringey 31.5314 Lewisham 29.4415 Barking and Dagenham 28.6916 Nottingham 28.4417 Camden 28.2318 Hammersmith and Fulham 28.1919 Newcastle upon Tyne 27.9520 Brent 26.95

Source: DETR, 1998a.

Table 13 shows the 20 most deprived localauthority areas. Newcastle is less than fivepoints behind Islington at tenth, which is onlyfour points behind Manchester at third. InnerLondon and the Midlands rank among the mostdeprived areas of the country. This underlinesthe national dimension of concentrateddeprivation. On core indices, the most deprivedboroughs and neighbourhoods show similarpatterns, though the intensity of specificproblems varies.

14


Concentrated deprivation

Table 14 shows the proportion of householdsexperiencing deprivation, long-termunemployment, in manual rather than non-manual jobs, and children in lone parenthouseholds. Manual work is associated withlower pay and job losses; lone parenthood isassociated with poverty and other risks(Kiernan, 1997; Hobcraft, 1998; Gregg,forthcoming).

A large majority of male workers in the fourareas class themselves as manual workers, farabove the national or city averages. Jobs havechanged but the skills of the male populationhave not changed at the same rate.

There is a surplus of men with a manualwork background, a loss of manual jobs(particularly from inner cities), coupled with arise in female employment, more often in

non-manual, service occupations. Ourneighbourhoods fare particularly badly becauseof their history of industrial, low skill, workingclass employment. Concentrated poverty was,according to reports from both cities, the singlebiggest explanatory factor in neighbourhoodproblems (Manchester and Newcastle, 1998).

The four wards we studied come within the5 per cent most deprived wards in England. Allthe neighbourhoods are part of a wider area ofsevere deprivation. Mapping the 5 per cent mostdeprived wards in England (on both BreadlineBritain and work poverty indices) shows large‘poverty clusters’ (CASE, 1998). In Manchester,16 wards, including our two neighbourhoods,form one poverty cluster. In Newcastle, oneneighbourhood is in a cluster of four wards, theother in a cluster of three wards (see Table 15).

Table 14 Characteristics of city and neighbourhood populations

Nationally Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

Households deprived1 (%) 18 34 30 41 41 39 46Long-term unemployed 27* 39 34* 40 38 45 42

(% of all unemployed), July 1997(* January 1998)

Manual, 19912 All 41 48 42 66 62 61 67(% of all employed) Men only 49 56 50 73 70 76 82

Children in lone parent 11 37 32 39 35 33 33households3 (%)

Source: Labour Force Survey, 1990 and 1991; 1991 Census; Newcastle’s 1996 Inter-Censal Survey;Regional Trends, 1998; Manchester Matters, 1997; Newcastle City Council Community Appraisal,1997.

1 As defined in Breadline Britain index.2 Includes the following socio-economic groups from the 1991 Census: manual workers (foremen,

supervisors, skilled and own account), personal service and semi-skilled manual workers,unskilled manual workers.

3 As defined in 1991 Census.

15

Social dynamics

Ethnic composition

Manchester has a high concentration of ethnicminority households compared with Newcastleand the country as a whole, with 13 per cent ofthe population belonging to ethnic minoritygroups. Newcastle is below the national averagewith 4 per cent. Ethnic minorities are under-represented in all four inner areas we studied.Ninety-five per cent of their populations ormore are classed as white. Table 16 shows this.

This distribution reflects the fact that thefour inner areas were all traditional workingclass neighbourhoods linked to the heavymanufacturing of their earlier growth eras. Thepredominantly white character of the four areasunderlines a finding from earlier work on riotsand on marginal estates that race is not a causeof acute urban decline, though it may becomepart of the process in areas where large numbers

of ethnic minority households live (Power, 1997;Power and Tunstall, 1997; Modood et al., 1997).

Crime

National and city crime levels between 1993 and1997 fell steadily. But violent crime rose inEngland and more steeply in Manchester.Figures for Northumbria, including Newcastle,show a significant fall in all crime, includingviolent crime. Table 17 shows this.

In all our neighbourhoods, crime,harassment and witness intimidation are bigproblems. Drug use and drug dealing werefrequently mentioned. We found a highconsciousness of crime, and the areas have allhad high-profile press coverage of particularlyserious incidents. But special measures,particularly by the police, housing service andresidents, have had a strong, positive impact.Proactive policing had made significant in-roadsinto hard-core crime, and co-ordinated actionwith residents had increased confidence andquality of life.

As a result, one of the neighbourhoods has aburglary rate below the city average. Fewer thanone in five feels unsafe in this area. Thiscompares with nearly one in two feeling unsafein another area, although reported crime therehas reduced by 50 per cent over the past six

Table 15 Poverty clusters

No. of wards PopulationNeighbourhood in cluster of cluster1

M1+M2 16 175,000N3 4 35,000N4 3 27,000

Source: CASE, 1998.

1 Population figures from 1991 Census.

Table 16 Ethnic composition of Manchester, Newcastle and four areas, 1991 (%)

National Cities Areasaverage Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

White 94.5 87 96 96 95 98 99Non-white 5.5 13 4 4 5 2 1

Sources: Census, 1991; DoE, 1996.

16


years as Figure 1 illustrates (Newcastle CityCouncil, 1994; Northumbria Police, 1998).Although there is often a problem of under-reporting, the active police presence in these

areas, including witness support, and the goodworking relationship between police, housingstaff and residents, helps explain the fall.

Figure 1 Total recorded crimes in neighbourhood (N3) 1992–98

Table 17 Notifiable offences recorded by the police per 100,000 population by police force area and offence

group

All Violent Theft andPolice force area Year crimes crime Burglary handling

England 1993 10,846 575 2,703 5,4101994 10,296 610 2,480 5,0141995 9,963 607 2,429 4,7961996 9,795 667 2,275 4,6431997 8,885 666 1,973 4,195

Greater Manchester 1993 14,178 654 3,802 6,8311994 13,111 615 3,532 6,0231995 12,723 622 3,330 5,7971996 12,721 727 3,249 5,6201997 11,936 847 2,944 5,168

Northumbria 1993 14,840 576 4,371 6,1191994 14,120 564 3,959 5,6891995 13,466 546 3,667 5,4681996 11,796 497 2,977 4,7761997 9,770 453 2,411 4,209

Source: Criminal Statistics England and Wales. London: HMSO, 1993–97.

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Mo

nth

ly c

rim

e to

tal

0

Month

Jul. 9

2

Sep. 9

2

Nov. 92

Jan. 9

3

Mar

. 93

May

93

Jul. 9

3

Sep. 9

3

Nov. 93

Jan. 9

4

Mar

. 94

May

94

Jul. 9

4

Sep. 9

4

Nov. 94

Jan. 9

5

Mar

. 95

May

95

Jul. 9

5

Sep. 9

5

Nov. 95

Jan. 9

6

Mar

. 96

May

96

Jul. 9

6

Sep. 9

6

Nov. 96

Jan. 9

7

Mar

. 97

May

97

Jul. 9

7

Sep. 9

7

Nov. 97

Jan.98

17

5 Housing patterns – how problematic

are they?

Next we examine housing patterns to establishtheir effect on the overall decline of the citiesand neighbourhoods.

Tenure

The way housing is owned in the two cities isvery different from the national pattern, thoughit is fairly typical of inner urban areas. Table 18shows the tenure pattern.

Both Manchester and Newcastle have nearlydouble the national proportion of council stockand more housing association activity thanaverage. Conversely, they have far lower levelsof owner occupation and around the average forprivate renting. The tenure distribution is evenmore skewed in the four neighbourhoods with ahigher proportion of social renting than the cityaverage –at least two-and-a-half times thenational level. A majority of all housing in theneighbourhoods is council owned. Owneroccupation is less than half the national average.

The relatively low level of owner occupationin the cities as a whole and the fourneighbourhoods in particular has an impact on

who lives in the city, who leaves and who wantsto stay. In predominantly low incomeneighbourhoods within significantly lowincome cities, tenure plays a very important role– originally in ensuring that the poor werehoused, but today driving depopulation as thenumbers wanting and able to buy have risen,particularly in younger age groups. But, if theneighbourhood conditions are poor, then fewwill want to invest in owner occupation even ifit is available and cheap, thus fuelling a viciouscircle, as illustrated in Figure 2.

People leave for surrounding areas, such asNorth Tyneside outside Newcastle, or Rochdaleand Altrincham, outside Manchester. Thispattern has resulted in low Right to Buy levels,far below the national average. Owner occupiersalready in these neighbourhoods often ‘feelcompletely trapped’ by declining propertyvalues, and the surrounding social andenvironmental problems (Manchester CityCouncil, 1998e).

Housing associations are significantproviders of rented housing in the cities andneighbourhoods. Their role in regeneration has

Table 18 The tenure pattern in the two cities and four neighbourhoods, compared with the national average

(%)

Nationalaverage Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

Local authority renting 20 38 35 50 54 48 77Owner occupied 68 41 50 28 30 35 16Private renting 9 12 9 8 8 10 2Housing associations 3 7 5 13 6 6 4

Source: 1991 Census (from Newcastle City Profiles and Manchester Ward Profiles); ONS et al. (1996).

18


led to their strong growth in the 1990s.The private rented sector is small. The high

proportion of social renting – two-thirds of allhouseholds – helps to explain this. Nonetheless,private landlords let often to marginalhouseholds. The local authorities saw privatelandlords as offering a fail-safe for people. Theyplay an important role within the cities andlocal authorities want to involve them inneighbourhood renewal (Manchester andNewcastle, 1998). The case studies suggest agrowth in private renting since 1991.

Changing housing patterns

Tenure change in the two cities has followednational trends, with a rise in owner occupation,a fall in council renting and a rise in housingassociation renting. In the neighbourhoods, theincrease in housing association property was

conspicuous, even though, as a proportion oftotal households, the sector remained small. Inneighbourhood N4, for example, although thepoint change was relatively small, the actualnumber of households living in the housingassociation sector more than tripled and those inowner occupation doubled. Other changes weregenerally smaller than average (see Table 19).

Many of the council losses in the cities wereto Right to Buy purchasers. Some of thesepurchasers later became private landlords whenthey could not sell on their properties. But, in allthe neighbourhoods, there was very little Rightto Buy. Table 20 shows the proportion of sales inboth cities and the four neighbourhoods.

Figure 3 shows the proportion of councilstock that has been sold across 26 wards inNewcastle, varying from nearly 50 per cent tounder 5 per cent. Our two neighbourhoods areclose to the bottom.

Source: Manchester and Newcastle, 1998.

Figure 2 Vicious circle of tenure and conditions in low income neighbourhoods

Poor neighbourhoodconditions

Low right tobuy take up

Low value ofneighbourhood

Highpercentage ofsocial renting

Low incomeresidents

Low percentage ofowner occupation

Exodus of those wantingto buy, particularly young

Low value of owneroccupied property

19

Housing patterns – how problematic are they?

Table 19 Tenure change as a % point change of share of total, 1981–91


Local authority –10 –9 –11 –7 –3 –7 –12Owner occupation +11 +5 +11 +2 0 +3 +9Private rented –2 +11 –2 –21 01 –1 –1Housing association +1 +2 +2 +7 +3 +4 +3

Source: 1991 and 1981 Census data collated by Manchester and Newcastle City Council; ONS et al.(1996).

1 A small number of properties rented with a job or business have been included in the privaterented figures for 1991. These were previously included in the housing association figures.

Table 20 Levels of Right to Buy sales, 1981–98


Percentage of 1981 stock 25 14 19 81 21 3 9sold to sitting tenants

Source: City Councils, 1998.

1 Percentage of 1998 stock.

Ward

Per

cent

age

of 1

981

stoc

k so

ld

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

N4 N3

Figure 3 The pattern of Right to Buy sales in Newcastle showing the percentage of stock sold in each ward

Source: Newcastle City Council, June 1998.

20


Housing types

The two cities have a high proportion of houses– around 70 per cent of the stock. Flats areconcentrated in post-war council estates, someolder pre-war blocks, sub-divided older housesand Tyneside flats. A majority of the houses areterraced and many date from the nineteenthcentury. A tiny proportion are detached.

The four neighbourhoods are alsopredominantly made up of houses, mainlyterraced. Terraced houses are both Victorian andcouncil-built in this century. Terraced houseshave been traditionally popular across thecountry but, in all four neighbourhoods, theback alleys and yards between properties, built

Table 21 The distribution of types of stock in the two cities and four neighbourhoods (percentage)

NationalStock type average Manchester Newcastle M1 M2 N3 N4

Detached 22 3 5 1 1 2 1Semi-detached 31 28 31 22 10 32 10Terraced 28 41 32 56 59 46 53Flat 19 28 32 21 30 21 37

Sources: Social Trends (ONS, 1997, p. 172); 1991 Census (quoted in Manchester Ward Profiles andNewcastle City Profiles).

for soil carts to remove sewage before moderndrains, led to abandonment (see photographs).

Table 21 shows the break-down of housingtypes.

Generally, the housing stock in all fourneighbourhoods is attractive, solidly built, welllaid out and well maintained. Even semi-abandoned streets are generally made up ofsuch property. There are only one or two estatesand blocks of clumsy, unattractive design. Manyof the least popular, hardest to manage blockshave been demolished. Overall it is hard to seephysical housing design or quality reasons whythese neighbourhoods have hit such extremedifficulty. The photographs show this.

21

Housing patterns – how problematic are they?

Back alleys

22


High quality modern housing

association property in low

demand

Housing association properties –

empties and occupied homes are

interspersed

Part II

Evidence of incipient abandonment

25

Next, we look at evidence from the fourneighbourhoods of actual abandonment.Abandonment signals the loss of value and useof an area. It attracts vandalism, boarding upand neglect of conditions. It often leads to arson,crime and refuse dumping. It lowers standardsmore generally and creates fear. The starkestmeasure of an area’s decline is visible emptyproperty (Power, 1987, 1997; Downes, 1989).

The four neighbourhoods experienced abuild-up of abandoned homes, either with netcurtains to disguise their emptiness or withsteel, sytex or wooden security shuttering. In allof the areas, whole streets and groups of streetswere semi-abandoned.

Empty property

In the four neighbourhoods, the picture iscomplex and sometimes out of control. TheNewcastle neighbourhoods have between 13and 20 per cent of their council property empty.The Manchester areas have risen steeply from 5per cent two years ago to around 15 per cent.The problem of abandonment in Manchester isbelieved to be catching up with Newcastle(Manchester City Council, 1998e). Both citiesreported a swift, sudden and unexpected loss ofdemand. We counted the numbers of emptyproperties in specific streets in the worstaffected areas on a specific day. Table 22summarises what we found in particular streets.This exercise does not show the overall patternof empty property in the four neighbourhoods.Appendix 9 shows city-wide levels of emptyproperty in the private and public sectors,difficult to let properties and demolition figures.

We observed the following in the worstaffected areas:

• The boarded up properties can belong tothe local authority, a local housingassociation, a private landlord, an owneroccupier – abandonment is affecting alltenures.

• The semi-abandoned streets or blocksinclude Victorian terraces, 1930s councilcottages, post-war houses, modernhousing association developments lessthan ten years old, small blocks ofsheltered flats, 1960s’ and 1970s’ purpose-built estates – all property types areinvolved.

• The streets with boarded up propertiesare not on the whole badly maintained, orunappealing; they tend to containattractive, small-scale, well built houseswith gardens; transferred to an innerLondon context, many of the propertieswould be gentrified.

• There are frequent discussions in the citycouncils about demolition – the de-stabilising effect on the community isintense.

• Some unlet properties belonging tohousing associations are in pristinecondition; they cost around £60,000 a unitto build less than ten years ago – theirabandonment is hard to explain.

• Some Victorian terraces are solid,attractive and renovated, but the backsare a jumble of outhouses, high walls andrubbish-strewn alleys – ugly, insecure andlong outdated. No way has been found ofturning these yards and alleys intosecure, joined-up back gardens.

6 Urban abandonment

26


• Many individual houses are stillattractive but the neighbourhoodenvironment is an active deterrent.

Many managers and residents believe thatthere simply are not enough people to keep the

houses filled. The people have gone but thehouses are there and, in one or two places, arestill being built!

Table 22 The tenure, number of units and volume of empty property in 30 streets in four neighbourhoods

on a specific day in 1998

Street or block Tenure (main landlord) No. of units No. empty % empty

1 Local authority 6 5 832 Local authority 208 93 453 Local authority 34 14 414 Local authority 60 17 285 Local authority 27 7 266 Local authority 16 4 257 Local authority 90 22 248 Local authority 63 13 219 Local authority 90 19 2110 Local authority 16 3 1911 Local authority 37 7 1912 Local authority 90 15 1713 Local authority 27 4 1514 Local authority 111 14 1315 Local authority 50 6 1216 Local authority 94 11 1217 Local authority 87 7 818 Local authority 171 11 619 Housing association/private 11 7 6420 Housing association/private 74 47 6421 Housing association/private 26 15 5822 Housing association/private 12 6 5023 Housing association/private 82 32 3924 Housing association/private 84 30 3625 Housing association/private 55 18 3326 Housing association/private 26 8 3127 Private 12 6 5028 Private 37 15 4029 Private 24 5 2030 Private 26 5 19

Source: Fieldwork street counts and LA Housing Department information, September 1998.

27

Urban abandonment

This emptying street is likely to be demolished (private and HA)

28


Demolition

In each city, there is now a regular demolitionprogramme of at least 250 local authorityproperties a year. It is likely to rise based oncurrent predictions. These figures do notinclude the much larger-scale demolition withinregeneration programmes in all fourneighbourhoods. They also do not includeprivate demolitions which are significant, butnot monitored in the same way by the localauthority. The demolitions keep the volume ofempty homes within bounds in the worst hitareas. However, three of the fourneighbourhoods appear to be experiencinggalloping abandonment in restricted areas.

Demolition has not generally stemmed thetide of abandonment although demolition ofspecific unpopular blocks has sometimesincreased the popularity of surrounding houses.In some instances, demolition has fuelled theproblem, creating an atmosphere of uncertaintyover the future of the area, giving a signal ofzero value and zero demand, thereby deterringwould-be applicants. Many demolitiondecisions are being made in response toimmediate neighbourhood conditions without aclear overall plan, or a full option appraisal(Newcastle City Council, 1998b). Other nearbystreets then often start to show the samesymptoms, as the blight from abandonmentinfects the atmosphere of the surroundingstreets and fear drives people in adjacent streetsaway.

Views about demolition were very mixedwith most people seeing it as both positive andnegative. Some current demolition proposals areprovoking objections and there is certainly notunanimous support for it, even where levels ofabandonment are high. Remaining residents

often want to hold on (see Part IV). Whiledemolition helped remove blighted property, itsignalled a more general loss of confidence inthe area when the demolished property wassound and in good condition, as it usually was.

Other cities are demolishing council housingon a larger scale: 2,000 council homes a year arebeing demolished in Glasgow (Webster, 1998); atleast 8,000 council properties were demolishedin Liverpool in the 1980s, only a smallproportion of which were replaced (Ridley,1996). There is also significant councildemolition going on in London, based onregeneration schemes in the 1990s – forexample, in Hackney 5,000, Southwark 2,000,Tower Hamlets 2,000, Brent 3,000 and Islington600. The particular problems of the two cities westudied closely are part of a much biggerprocess. However, central government andregional offices do not have up-to-dateinformation on the scale of demolition (DETR,1997a).

Pace of abandonment

The speed with which streets or blocks areshifting from being relatively well occupied tonearly half-empty is alarming. Over a relativelylong period, the level of turnover had beenunusually high; new demand was heavilyconcentrated among more transient, unstableand younger households; and the level of emptyproperty was above the city average of 3–5 percent – at least 15 per cent in two of theneighbourhoods. This created instability and areduction in informal social controls leaving avacuum which eventually tipped a highlylocalised low demand area into rapidabandonment. Table 23 shows the rapid change.

29

Urban abandonment

Table 24 highlights the change on specificestates or in small areas within theneighbourhoods.

Property values

Low property values reflect the reducingeconomic and social value of these areas. Insome pockets of all four areas, some owneroccupied property cannot be sold at all. We

Table 23 Empty council property in the four neighbourhoods over the period 1995–98

Neighbourhood levels of empty property (number of empties)Year M1 M2 N3 N4

1995–96 (quarter 4) 81 43 260 3081996–97 (quarter 4) 127 148 257 3091997–98 (quarter 1) 176 174 244 3411997–98 (quarter 2) 231 230 214 3441997–98 (quarter 3) 211 238 217 4171997–98 (quarter 4) 260 234 225 4241998–99 (quarter 1) 326 277 252 4421998–99 (quarter 2) 317 306 2151 473

Source: Newcastle and Manchester Housing Departments.

1 Demolitions account for the different pattern of empty property in this neighbourhood.

found private properties that had been boughtfor £30,000 seven years ago now worth only£5,000, and properties bought for £20,000 tenyears ago worth only £2,000. The low privateproperty values help explain the low level ofRight to Buy in the areas. The discounted valueof Right to Buy – around £13,000 – was only alittle below the national average of £15,000, butfar above the private market value (see Table25).

Table 24 The rapid change in % of empty property in six small areas within the four neighbourhoods,

1995–98

1995–96 1996–97 1997–98

Small area 1 2 6 19Small area 2 7 13 16Small area 3 6 18 35Small area 4 4 8 15Small area 5 9% (1993) 13 14 15Small area 6 5% (1994) 12 13 18

Source: Newcastle and Manchester Housing Departments.

30


An estate agent in one of the areas explainedthe problem in these words:

I have been an estate agent practising in the innercity for the past 23 years. In the last five years,property prices in these areas have slumped, inmy opinion due to the fact that a large amount ofcrime and vandalism has been rife within theseareas. If the properties are empty, then they willbe vandalised within hours of the formeroccupants leaving the property. Anything of valuesuch as combination boilers and pipework, fires,kitchen units and bathroom units are immediatelystripped from the properties and sold.

People will no longer tolerate living in the innercity areas and there has been a massivebreakdown in the communities due to the factthat properties are broken into on a regular basis,owners threatened and I know of casespersonally where owner occupiers have movedout and given their properties up for possessionbecause they have been threatened by localgangs of thugs.

The estate agent gave some current examplesof the changes in private property values in oneof our neighbourhoods (see Table 26).

Turnover and access to council housing

Turnover counts numbers leaving in a year as aproportion of occupied units at the beginning.We have turnover figures only for the localauthority stock. But, when we spoke toresidents and landlords, we understoodturnover to be a serious problem in all tenures.The figures suggest extraordinarily highturnover rates within the council stock. Bothcities far exceed the national average turnoveracross their council stock (see Table 27).

In spite of the loss of one-quarter of thenational council stock under Right to Buy,transfer of ownership to other landlords anddemolitions, social landlords continued toallocate over a quarter of a million properties ineach year from 1979 to new tenants. By 1995, theoverall volume of social lettings rose

Table 25 Right to Buy values (after discount)

Neighbourhood 1 Neighbourhood 2

Manchester £16,250 £10,170Newcastle £11,500 £14,700

Source: City Councils.

Note: National average £15,000.

Table 26 Examples of falling private property values in one neighbourhood

Previous value 1998 value

Property 1 £23,995 (1991) No valueProperty 2 £28,000 (1989/90) £5,000Property 3 £28,000 (1990) £5,000

Source: Estate agent’s information provided to private sector team, Manchester, 1998.

31

Urban abandonment

significantly, as Figure 4 shows, although thelarge increase in housing association new letsdrew some tenants out of council housing.

A significant proportion of vacancies are dueto the more elderly tenant population dying off(Burrows, 1997). Therefore, within councilhousing, increasingly youthful households havebeen rehoused at a surprisingly high rate. The

rate of turnover also reflects increasing choice,which in itself can be seen as positive, and highturnover areas have always played a role incities. But, if turnover moves above a certainlevel, it can become unmanageable. Across theneighbourhoods, the turnover rate was between20 and 50 per cent. Table 28 illustrates theproblem.

Waiting lists

Local authority waiting lists are not a reliablepredictor of demand. About 40 per cent ofapplicants disappear each year through findingother housing solutions, changing plans,circumstances and aspirations (Prescott-Clark et

al., 1994). Nor are waiting lists sensitive to therestricted options which many applicants arewilling to contemplate. Applicants have little

Table 27 Rate of reletting1 in council housing in the

two cities and nationally, 1996/97 (%)

National Manchester Newcastle

12.5 19.5 22.4

Source: HIP1 returns to the DETR, 1997.

1 These figures represent the total lettingsdivided by the total dwellings, as recordedon the HIP1 forms.

Year1979 1985 1990

No.

of l

ettin

gs to

new

tena

nts

(tho

usan

ds)

By local authorities

By housing associations

Total social lettings1

19950

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Source: Hills in Glennerster and Hills (1998, p. 156).

1 There may be a small amount of double-counting as a result of housing associations sometimes allocating

to council tenants.

Figure 4 Volume of lettings to new tenants by social landlords, 1979–95

32


Table 28 Level of turnover in 16 specific estates or areas of council housing, 1996–97

Turnover % perEstate or block Neighbourhood Number of units annum (1996/97)

1 M1 366 242 M1 300 203 M1 405 404 M1 96 545 M1 293 256 M1 199 307 M2 182 288 M2 300 209 M2 225 2310 N3 470 2911 N3 540 3412 N3 398 3613 N4 196 5114 N4 115 4715 N4 87 4616 N4 127 54

Source: Manchester and Newcastle housing departments, 1997.

Table 29 Numbers on the waiting list for Manchester and Newcastle, 1992–1997

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

Manchester 17,3953 12,743 9,507 8,564 6,149 5,3182

% of stock1 24 18 14 13 9 8

Newcastle 5,531 5,694 5,393 5,203 4,812 4,5082

% of stock1 13 14 13.5 13 12 12

Sources: Newcastle City Council Housing Annual Reports 1992–97; Manchester Committee Report,30 May 1996; and Manchester Housing Department, 1998.

1 Stock figures from DETR.2 Estimated numbers leaving council stock each year: Manchester, 11,500; Newcastle, 3,800.3 According to Manchester, this figure may include transfers. All others do not.

33

Urban abandonment

Table 31 Demand for properties in the Manchester neighbourhoods – % of properties by waiting time

(based on expected turnover and actual numbers on the waiting list)

Houses Low rise flatsWaiting time in months Waiting time in months

Less than 1 2–9 Over 9 Less than 1 2–9 Over 9

M11996 53 46 2 88 5 71997 54 44 2 86 8 6M21996 31 38 30 52 15 341997 39 29 32 61 17 22

Source: Manchester City Council Housing Department.

idea what they will be offered or when, thoughthey can often state a broad area preference. Thesystem is usually highly impersonal with littledirect or proactive choice. Rehousing isgenerally based on some criterion of need.Therefore, only needy people generally apply.Refusal of offers is the main mechanism of‘choice’. Also many waiting lists, particularlyfor large urban authorities, are not up-to-datebecause of the scale of the council stock and thevolume of turnover. Nonetheless, they do givesome idea of general demand.

Newcastle’s waiting list fell by 1,023 from1992, while Manchester’s fell by 12,000. Table 29shows the exact figures.

The steep decline in Manchester’s list since1992 is mainly because of the council

undertaking a major ‘clean-up’ of the list toensure that those people registered do actuallywant housing. Manchester’s exclusion policy forineligible applicants accounts for only a smallpart of the overall reduction (Manchester CityCouncil, 1998f).

In Newcastle, the steep decline occurredearlier: there was a significant drop between1986 and 1987 explained by increased efficiencyin monitoring the waiting list at this time. Sincethen, numbers have generally continued to fall,though more gradually. Table 30 shows this.

The waiting time to be rehoused haddropped in both cities. Table 31 based onManchester’s figures shows that a majority inthe least popular neighbourhood are rehousedwithin a month of applying. In the less decayedneighbourhood, the wait is on average sixmonths for a house, less for a flat. There are alsopopular areas in the cities with longer waitingtimes.

In both Newcastle neighbourhoods, we weretold there was virtually no waiting list orwaiting time for rehousing. Both cities havenow opened their allocations and areadvertising nationally.

Table 30 Numbers on the waiting list for

Newcastle, 1986–91

1986 1987 1988 1989 1991

Newcastle 12,500 7,542 5,721 5,209 5,372

Source: Newcastle City Council HousingAnnual Reports, 1986–91

34


35

Urban abandonment

Housing associations

While council housing is dominant in the citiesand neighbourhoods, housing associations havebecome increasingly important. They enteredthe scene in the 1970s, renovating older terracedproperty. In the 1980s, they became the favouredregeneration partners and implementers ofgovernment policy. Local authorities,government offices for the regions andpoliticians, afraid of losing ‘their share of thecake’, argued for the need to diversify tenure;create newer, higher quality housing; andcapitalise on government support.

Because it was cheaper to develop in theNorth and jobs were short, many argued thatthe North should continue to receive its share ofcapital allocations for housing. The result is thatsome very attractive, small-scale, high qualitydevelopments tucked into the four areas areexperiencing extreme low demand, either‘poaching’ tenants from older but oftenrenovated council housing or simply findingproperties unlettable.

Housing associations have also activelybought up street properties from retreatingowner occupiers as prices fell. But the commonproblem facing both kinds of social landlords isplummeting demand.

Some argue that attractive, new, small-scaledevelopments enhance the prospects ofregeneration and help to keep people in the areawho otherwise might have moved away. Thealternative view is that, unless job opportunitiesexpand, such strategies are bound to fail.

Some residents actively campaigned againsthousing association development, whilst, inother parts, residents supported or eveninitiated development. But housing associationsare now demolishing unlettable, unsellableproperty. Unless regeneration takes off, much ofthe costly building of the last ten years will bewasted.

Private landlords

Private renting began to make a comeback inthe wake of deregulation and the collapse in the

Housing association sheltered

scheme completed c. 1990 –

likely to be demolished

36


owner occupier market in the late 1980s(Malpass and Means, 1993).

Low income owners, unable to sell at a levelthat would redeem their mortgage, sometimesbecame landlords of last resort, using thehousing benefit system. The same housingbenefit incentive, until recently paying 100 percent of the full rent for low income tenants, hasattracted speculative private landlords too.There were rumours of various ‘scams’. Butprivate landlords are seriously affected byabandonment.

Table 32 shows the level of empty propertyexperienced by housing associations and privatelandlords in small areas within theneighbourhoods.

Rented housing in all sectors wasexperiencing a serious collapse in demand:

• structurally sound, attractive, improvedproperties proved unlettable

• weak social controls and high levels ofvandalism led to empty properties oftenbeing destroyed

• social landlords were operating in directcompetition with each other

• landlords and tenants used the ‘100%benefit system’ to facilitate the movementof a diminishing number of tenantsaround surplus stock

• private landlords speculated arounddemolition decisions, buying up propertyfor little in the hope of high rent fromtemporary lettings, before CompulsoryPurchase Orders

• private landlords were often willing torehouse evicted tenants as long as therent was guaranteed

• local authorities and police werestruggling to enforce basic standards andreduce crime

• long-standing residents, often in smallenclaves, were fighting to hold conditionsas properties in the streets aroundemptied.

Table 32 Level of empty property at 1997 in small areas within the neighbourhoods

Units in area Number of units empty % empty

Housing associationsHA1 183 99 54HA2 16 9 56HA3 282 144 51

Private landlordsArea 1 329 138 42Area 2 137 26 19Area 3 447 134 30Area 4 1,905 362 19Area 5 24 12 50Area 6 93 37 40Area 7 120 24 20

Source: Interviews with housing associations and local authority statistics.

37

Urban abandonment

Schools

A shrinking population, high populationturnover and high levels of deprivation allimpact on schools. In turn, school performanceaffects neighbourhood prospects. Tables 33 and34 show changes in school rolls, spare placesand pupil turnover in the local primary andsecondary schools serving one of ourneighbourhoods. They also show performancecompared with the national average.

The state primary and secondary schoolshave all suffered from falling rolls and surplusplaces. This reduction matches the falling wardpopulation and falling numbers of childrenunder 16. The proportion of free school meals, aclear measure of poverty, is extraordinarilyhigh; in two schools it is four times the nationalaverage. More than double the nationalproportion of children in the state primaries hadspecial educational needs. Educationalattainment was generally far below the nationalaverage, though one primary school scoredabove the national average in science. The gapby GCSE had widened even further. Theoutcome measures are crude and make noallowance for the educational difficultiesteachers face. Nonetheless, children’s lifechances are constricted by such low educationalattainment.

The performance of the Catholic primaryand secondary schools is in sharp contrast.While there are falling numbers of Catholicprimary pupils, the school recruits from furtherafield and makes up numbers with non-Catholicapplicants. Figure 5 shows the contrasting trendin school rolls. The Catholic schools have farfewer free school meals and less children withspecial educational needs. Even allowing for

this, they perform better than expected at GCSEand in English at primary level – above thenational average. The ‘value added’ issignificant. This is a pattern repeated in Catholicschools in poor areas throughout the countryand is worthy of closer study (CatholicEducation Service, 1997). It relates to the ethos,pastoral role, approach to discipline, parentalsupport and teaching methods. As yet,educational research has not fully explained thedifference.

Demolition of housing immediatelysurrounding two of the primaries as part of aregeneration programme destabilised thepopulation, including the schools. Theregeneration programme within theneighbourhood was removing housing,reducing the number of pupils and spending asubstantial amount on school buildings andeducation projects in the area. Thiscontradiction upset teachers as they battledagainst near impossible odds to save theirschools.

Pupil turnover and falling rolls reinforceeach other, creating funding problems and lossof morale among staff. Schools can becomesocially unviable unless extraordinary measuresare introduced. Figure 6 shows this.

The poor academic performance of schoolsin poor neighbourhoods does have a strongdeterrent effect on potential residents. It alsoleads to families with high aspirations movingaway (Rudlin, 1998; Urban Task Force, 1999b).

The local authority is developing a newapproach to schools with falling rolls in thisarea. The goal is to retain families with strongloyalty to the school, get parents involved,provide a base for adult education and usesurplus space for other council services.

38

The slow death of great cities?Ta

ble

33

Su

mm

ary

of

pri

ma

ry s

cho

ol

cha

ract

eri

stic

s

% s

urp

lus

%

pu

pil

s w

ith

SE

N3

%

of

elig

ible

pu

pil

s ac

hie

vin

g%

ch

ange

p

lace

s%

pu

pil

(

1997

)

Lev

el 4

or

abov

e in

Key

Sta

ge 2

Sch

ool

in

rol

l (J

anu

ary

turn

over

%FS

M2

W

ith

te

sts

(199

7)n

ame1

Sch

ool t

ype

(198

2–97

)

199

8)(1

994/

95)

(19

97)

Tota

l SE

Nst

atem

ents

4E

ngl

ish

Mat

hs

Sci

ence

Fiel

dw

ayC

ount

y–3

734

4490

761

4548

69B

eech

Tre

eC

ount

y–2

638

1945

464

5634

51G

rove

Cou

nty

–29

3529

8254

122

1922

All

Sain

tsV

olun

tary

+30

00

3118

170

5353

aid

ed(C

atho

lic)

LE

A–

––

––

––

5150

.960

.2av

erag

eN

atio

nal

––

––

22.9

18.5

1.4

62.5

61.3

68.1

aver

age

Sour

ce: L

EA

and

Ofs

ted

. (W

here

ther

e w

as a

dis

crep

ancy

bet

wee

n th

e tw

o so

urce

s, th

e fi

gure

clo

sest

to th

e in

form

atio

n fr

om th

ehe

ads’

inte

rvie

ws

was

use

d.)

1A

ll sc

hool

nam

es a

re

inve

nted

.2

FSM

= p

upils

in rec

eipt

of f

ree

scho

ol m

eals

.3

SEN

= p

upils

wit

h sp

ecia

l ed

ucat

ion

need

s (e

xpr

esse

d a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f the

Sep

tem

ber

roll)

.4

Stat

emen

t = p

upils

wit

h st

atem

ents

of s

peci

al e

duc

atio

n ne

eds

(exp

res

sed

as

a pe

rcen

tage

of t

he S

epte

mbe

r ro

ll).

39

Urban abandonmentTa

ble

34

Su

mm

ary

of

seco

nd

ary

sch

oo

l ch

ara

cte

rist

ics

% s

urp

lus

% p

up

ils

wit

h S

EN

3

% c

han

ge

pla

ces

% p

up

il

(19

97)

GC

SE

per

form

ance

(199

7)S

choo

l

in r

oll

(Jan

uar

ytu

rnov

er%

FSM

2

Wit

h%

ach

ievi

ng

% a

chie

vin

gn

ame1

Sch

ool t

ype

(198

2–97

)

199

8)(1

997/

98)

(19

97)

Tota

l SE

Nst

atem

ents

4

5

A–C

5 A

–G

Tha

mes

way

Cou

nty

–62

185

~10

56.4

211.

68

50O

ctav

iaV

olun

tary

+4

4~

020

.610

0.4

5492

aid

ed(C

atho

lic)

Aug

ustu

sV

olun

tary

+2

5–

19.5

6.6

0.9

5291

aid

ed(C

atho

lic)

LE

A–

––

––

––

3275

aver

age

Nat

iona

l–

––

–18

.216

.62.

343

.388

.5av

erag

e

Sour

ce: L

EA

and

Ofs

ted

. (W

here

ther

e w

as a

dis

crep

ancy

bet

wee

n th

e tw

o so

urce

s, th

e fi

gure

clo

sest

to th

e in

form

atio

n fr

om th

ehe

ads’

inte

rvie

ws

was

use

d.)

1A

ll sc

hool

nam

es a

re

inve

nted

.2

FSM

= p

upils

in rec

eipt

of f

ree

scho

ol m

eals

.3

SEN

= p

upils

wit

h sp

ecia

l ed

ucat

ion

need

s (e

xpr

esse

d a

s a

perc

enta

ge o

f the

Sep

tem

ber

roll)

.4

Stat

emen

t = p

upils

wit

h st

atem

ents

of s

peci

al e

duc

atio

n ne

eds

(exp

res

sed

as

a pe

rcen

tage

of t

he S

epte

mbe

r ro

ll).

5T

he d

iscrep

ancy

bet

wee

n th

e fa

lling

rol

l and

pro

port

ion

of s

urpl

us p

lace

s is

acc

ount

ed fo

r by

a s

erie

s of

sch

ool m

erge

rs.

40


0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97Year

Num

ber

of p

upils

on

roll

ThameswayOctaviaAugustus

Population loss

Fewer pupils

Places available

Lower entrance requirements

Lower reputation

Higher admissions of special needs

More integration problems forchildren with special difficulties

More teaching difficulty

Further exodus of pupils

Reduced per capita funding

Fixed overheads

Less funding for teaching

Redundancies and natural wastage

Imbalance in expertise

Lower teacher morale

More pressure

Negative impact on performance

Figure 6 Knock-on effects on school performance

Figure 5 Numbers on the roll of each of the secondary schools, 1982–97

Overall, we found both negative andpositive elements in city neighbourhoods.

Table 35 summarises both.

More integration problems forchildren with difficulties

41

Urban abandonmentTa

ble

35

Fa

cto

rs i

nfl

ue

nci

ng

cit

y n

eig

hb

ou

r ho

od

s –

ba

sed

on

th

e M

an

che

ste

r a

nd

Ne

wca

stle

ca

se s

tud

ies

Mul

tipl

e in

ner

city

dec

aySe

nse

of e

mpt

ines

sB

urnt

out

pro

pert

yA

band

oned

faci

litie

s, b

oard

ed u

p pr

oper

ties

Dem

olit

ion

site

s, b

ack

alle

ys, u

gly

high

fenc

es

No

over

arch

ing

plan

– o

r pe

rson

wit

h po

wer

ove

r al

l ser

vice

sPo

or s

choo

l per

form

ance

Unc

erta

in c

omm

itm

ent o

f som

e se

rvic

es to

are

aD

epar

tmen

talis

m, c

entr

alis

m, i

n-fi

ghti

ngL

ack

of c

onfi

den

ce in

futu

reU

phill

bat

tle

Man

y, fr

eque

nt s

etba

cks

Fear

, ins

ecur

ity

Los

s of

con

fid

ence

Bla

me

atta

ched

to y

outh

, new

com

ers,

cri

min

als

Som

e ve

ry d

iffi

cult

per

sona

litie

sSo

me

dan

gero

us b

ehav

iour

and

inti

mid

atio

nSt

rong

cri

tici

sm o

f pol

ice

and

hou

sing

ser

vice

sG

row

ing

aban

don

men

t

Con

tinu

ing

popu

lati

on a

nd jo

b lo

ssG

ener

al a

nti-

city

bia

sC

onst

ant p

ress

ures

aga

inst

the

poor

est i

nner

cit

y ne

ighb

ourh

ood

sR

egen

erat

ion

spen

din

g to

o fo

cuse

d o

n ph

ysic

al r

enew

alTo

o lit

tle

emph

asis

on

chan

ges

in jo

b si

tuat

ion

Poor

soc

ial a

nd e

cono

mic

con

nect

ions

Lar

ge-s

cale

une

mpl

oym

ent a

mon

g m

enH

igh

risk

/pr

ejud

ice

agai

nst i

nner

are

as

Nea

r ci

ty c

entr

eSp

ace

– gr

een

area

sG

ood

hou

sing

, som

e ve

ry g

ood

Spen

din

g on

impr

ovem

ents

Obv

ious

eff

ort t

o sa

ve a

rea

Som

e at

tem

pts

at c

o-or

din

atio

nSc

hool

s –

huge

eff

ort

Ver

y lo

calis

ed h

ousi

ng s

ervi

ceD

edic

ated

loca

l sta

ffPo

lice

– st

rong

liai

son

and

ant

i-cr

ime

mea

sure

sSp

ecia

l ini

tiat

ives

Som

e im

pact

Man

y st

able

res

iden

tsTr

aini

ng a

nd s

kill

build

ing

Surp

risi

ng c

omm

itm

ent t

o sa

ving

poc

kets

Stro

ng a

ttac

hmen

ts a

nd n

etw

orks

Ene

rgy

to k

eep

tryi

ngL

ead

ing

acti

vist

sR

esis

tanc

e to

dem

olit

ion

Stro

ng c

ivic

am

biti

on, c

ity

prid

e, lo

yalt

yPr

esti

ge d

evel

opm

ents

, str

uggl

e fo

r re

sour

ces

Rev

ivin

g ci

ty c

entr

e –

clos

e by

Eff

orts

at t

rain

ing

and

ski

ll bu

ildin

gSo

me

new

opp

ortu

niti

esE

asy

tran

spor

t lin

ksJo

b ex

pans

ion

for

wom

en a

nd s

ervi

ces

Figh

t for

inw

ard

inve

stm

ent

Con

dit

ions

Serv

ices

Com

mun

ity

Wid

er is

sues

Neg

ativ

e el

emen

tsP

osit

ive

elem

ents

Part III

The story of four neighbourhoods

This section attempts to convey the live experience of acute decline and the intense efforts to hold onto and rescue inner city neighbourhoods. The story of each area, using the words of local residentsand workers, emphasises the gravity of the situation and brings out the potential for rebirth.

45

About the area

Bankside is approximately two miles from thecity centre, on the riverside. In the past, it wasthe scene of much industrial activity. However,riverside industries suffered long-term declineand, during the 1970s and 1980s, the remainingindustrial base was relocated, encouraged bysubsidy. A business park opened nearby in1990/91 with government incentives. It includes67 firms, employing 4,800 people. However, thejobs are mostly in the service sector and fewerthan 100 local people are employed there. Theskills gap is a major obstacle.

Bankside has been losing population over along period. Demolition has been ongoing since1992. The landscape is thus constantly changing:

There is no greater portrayal of the transience ofan area than demolition. (Social worker)

Bankside’s housing is attractive –comprising modernised 1930s’ houses withfront and rear gardens, and some pre-1919terraced houses and flats (mostly refurbished byhousing associations and private landlords).

How/when it hit trouble

Bankside’s current problems have their roots inthe industrial restructuring of earlier decades,and the area has long had a reputation for highlevels of poverty and serious crime.

By the 1980s, low demand was visible:

Social services have usually been able to getpeople housed in Bankside – there has alwaysbeen property available. (Social worker)

The steep increase in empty propertieshappened between 1989, when there were 40–50

empties, and 1991 when the total had risen toaround 350. This coincided with an increase inthe amount of crime committed by young menagainst their own community – burglary, joy-riding and stripping empty houses.

People in work can buy cheaply elsewhere.Those on housing benefit have rented housingto choose from because of surplus housing inthe area:

There are bribes to people, almost, to move –furniture packages, redecoration allowances, anewly refurbished property. Although we‘regenerators’ think that we’re doing this toregenerate the property and make it moreattractive, in fact, to some extent, it is just fuellinga revolving door. (Regeneration manager).

Press coverage has added to Bankside’snegative image. Pictures of boarded up homesand young children vandalising properties carryheadlines such as ‘Little Beirut’.

One new-build housing associationdevelopment is empty, some of the houses neverhaving been let since they were built. Part of it isnow due to be demolished. Another housingassociation owns 44 refurbished, pepper-pottedstreet properties. Nineteen were empty at May1998. High quality council houses have nodemand:

The allocations policy is basically: ‘Do you want ahouse?’ (Senior council officer)

Not all parts of Bankside have been hitequally severely. There are pockets of stabilitywhich are a different world from the half-emptystreets just minutes away. Even within theemptying streets, committed long-standingresidents surrounded by boarded up homes,continue to attempt to create their own stability,

7 Bankside

46


with courage, tenacity, solidarity and pride.Extended family networks on particular

estates can be the main factor in their stability:

I love it – I feel very settled here. In LowerBankside, everyone is part of an extended family,and that’s the only reason we stay there.(Resident)

Equally, these networks can mean that, onceone household decides to go, several move outat once because of their family ties and theirdesire to move together.

Bankside is fragile, and vulnerable to rapidchange. Often, residents and communityworkers identify one factor as the immediatetrigger:

The council allocated a property to a vulnerableman who attracted a lot of other young men tocongregate there. The neighbours on each sideleft, and, over six months, the street steadilyemptied. Now, one side of the road is going to bedemolished. (Tenant support worker)

Since the fieldwork was completed, the otherside of this road is now also being demolished.

Inputs/impacts

Bankside’s problems have long been recognisedby central and local government. Localpoliticians and residents’ groups havesuccessfully fought for resources. The UrbanProgramme of the late 1970s, and more recentregeneration efforts such as Safer Cities, EstateAction and City Challenge, have injected manymillions of pounds into the area. These projectshave slowed the decay. But impacts often lastedonly as long as the programmes:

Five-year projects are no use at all. An area likethis needs help in a sustained way. The peoplehere want to help themselves, but they need helpto do it. (Primary school head)

Residents

Fed up with the stigma, the desolation of livingin a half-empty street, the harassment andvandalism, and tempted by housing on offerelsewhere, many residents have left:

A relatively minor incident can prompt people totake flight. (Local researcher)

A primary school head started to keep arecord of the reasons for people moving butstopped doing this when she discovered thatmost left because of harassment of some kind;serious, targeted harassment resulting fromsomeone informing to the police, or moregeneral threatening behaviour.

A survey of residents in one emptying streetrevealed that 50 per cent of the residents foundit ‘terrible/frightening’ to live in a street with somany empty properties, causing worry anddepression. The main factors causing people toleave were crime and fear of crime, intimidationby gangs of young people, harassment and anti-social behaviour by other tenants (CommunityGroup report, 1996):

Putting on a porch and landscaping the gardendoesn’t really do anything – it’s all very cosmetic.People will drive through the area now and think‘oh, it’s not that bad, these houses look reallynice’. But it’s to do with people. Somehow we’vegot to get hold of these families that are bullyingthe neighbourhood and shift them …somewhere. (Primary school head)

47

Bankside

Other residents are happy to live in the onlyplace that they have ever known as home,amongst their family and friends:

Where would I go anyway? I’m staying where I’mused to. (Resident)

Some residents have continued to fight in anorganised way to achieve the improvementsthat they want. An estate housing managementcommittee was formed in 1995 and extendedlast year to cover the whole neighbourhood. Thecommittee meets regularly with the localcouncil housing manager, monitors the housingservice and has an input into policy. Thetenants’ groups are also supporting newcomersto Bankside. Security is their number onepriority. Under the combined efforts of residentsand local housing staff, many new approacheshave been tried:

• show houses

• estate walkabouts

• patch reports by estate officers

• local display boards showing propertyavailable for letting

• a drop-in session for new tenants withlocal staff

• dedicated estate labourers

• rapid-response void clear-out

• tenants’ reporting channels.

In spite of these efforts, failures still arise.

Housing management

The council has a full-time local housing officein Bankside. Staff are attempting to develop

closer working with residents and are‘extremely committed to this difficult area’.Constructive work with the police is ongoing:

We are turning streets around by getting rid ofproblematic families, achieving a good standard ofrepairs, tidying up the voids, and concentratingour efforts. (Council officer)

However, it remains very hard to attractpeople into Bankside:

People don’t want to come to Bankside becausethey think it’s rough. (Council officer)

Schools

Three of the four primaries in the area havesuffered from falling rolls since 1988. Theirpupil populations are extremely deprived.

Families often show attachment to theschools, moving away but continuing to sendtheir children to the school until the journeyinvolved becomes too much to manage.

The main secondary school serving the areafailed its Ofsted inspection in 1995/96. Thisexacerbated its falling roll and added to thenegative reputation of the area. Although theschool came out of special measures inDecember 1997 and the roll has now stabilised,the deprivation of the pupil population has anenormous impact:

We have all sorts of social problems to deal with:children who are malnourished, who are abused,who can see no value in education becausethey’re the fourth generation of unemployedpeople, and they live on an estate with high levelsof crime, fluid movement of population, poverty… (Secondary school head)

48


Police

The relationship between the police and thecommunity has improved in recent years:

In the late 1980s, the police had a very negativeview of Bankside and its residents – they referredto it as ‘the swamp’. The police response hasdefinitely improved since then, and police carscan now be seen in the area every day.(Community development worker)

A range of policing initiatives has beenimplemented, including a witness supportscheme, joint working with housing, schoolsand residents, and an arson task force (runjointly with the fire brigade).

Unreported crime is a cause for concern,though:

Witness intimidation and fear of reprisals is amajor issue. (Senior police officer)

There are a small number of keytroublemakers:

There are 20 main persistent juvenile offenders inthe area command. If we got rid of them, wecould dramatically reduce crime. (Police officer)

Current options

Thirty-seven per cent of the council’s 1991 stockhas been demolished but this has not got rid ofthe empty properties. If demolition continues tobe the main response to streets that areemptying, then Bankside will be incrementallyrazed to the ground.

As long as people view Bankside as animpoverished, crime-ridden area, and as long asthey can gain access to attractive housingelsewhere, its downward spiral will continue.So far, the entrenched negative image, localmedia attention and general low demand haveoverpowered attempts to market the area.

The wider social and economic problemsneed to be given serious attention:

If as much investment as went intoimprovements to the housing stock and housingmanagement service had gone into local training,advice and resources to help people into decentpaid jobs, it is possible that the decline wouldhave been halted by now.(Community development worker)

Bankside has huge potential. Its housing isnot only adequate, it is excellent. Proximity tothe city centre and to major road networks is inits favour. Just a few miles away are thrivingareas. Security and reputation– neighbourhoodquality as well as housing quality – are clearlycrucial:

The city has plans to extend onto the greenbeltbecause people do like to move out. But we havea site here that if it were ten miles further alongthe river would be worth millions. It’s southfacing, it’s sunny, and the views are stunning.There’s no capital being made of the location.(Primary school head)

However, there is talk at city level ofdevelopers being drawn by the regenerationpotential of this neighbourhood.

49

About the area

The rows of late nineteenth-century terracesbuilt in City-Edge for people working in nearbyindustries were largely cleared during the 1960sand 1970s. Council houses, maisonettes anddeck access flats replaced them. Some pockets ofbetter quality terraced housing escapedclearance. Eleven of these streets, in a grid-ironpattern, make up Lower City-Edge, which wasrejuvenated temporarily when it was declared aHousing Action Area in the 1970s. The deckaccess flats were notorious from the day theywere built, and survived for only 15 yearsbefore being demolished and replaced by newcouncil houses in the 1990s. Private companieshave also built homes within the last nine yearsand housing associations were completing newhouses as recently as 1995. Even so, thereremain large patches of open, grassed-overdemolition sites.

Parts of City-Edge are nearly 50 per centempty. Some homes are physically inadequate –with structural problems or unpopular designfeatures. However, there are traditionallydesigned, modern, well built houses, with frontand back gardens, for which there is zerodemand. Much of the owner occupied housinghas either transferred to the private rentedsector or been abandoned completely. Thecouncil has estimated that two-thirds of housesin a private development of 80 homes are nowrented rather than owner occupied. Fifty-eightof the 138 privately owned homes in LowerCity-Edge were empty at October 1998.

City-Edge has always been a poor area, butpeople used to have a reason for living there –they had work nearby. By the late 1980s,however, most of the traditional engineering,textiles and steel jobs had been lost:

8 City-Edge

You can keep on patching up the housing, but,unless you actually have a reason for peoplewanting to be there, then you’ve lost it.(Local councillor)

It’s been a transit zone for a long time – with allthe clearance, refurbishment and new building.Some people have moved from one bit ofhousing to the next.(Community development worker)


In the second half of the 1980s, peoplerecognised the loss of demand:

We had a very stable community on our estateuntil 1986, when the local Tenants’ Associationsucceeded in getting the properties modernised.All 53 residents were decanted in order for theworks to take place, but only five householdschose to move back in afterwards. There was nogeneral hatred of the properties, it was just thattheir circumstances had changed. We had thesenew, modernised properties but people didn’twant to move into them. (Local councillor)

In other parts of City-Edge, acute lowdemand has appeared within the last six years.The immediate causes were crime, vandalismand serious anti-social behaviour:

Everyone leaves this area for the same reason:they fear for their safety.(Housing association officer)

I want to move now. Although I’ve never beenmithered by the gangs and I’ve never beenrobbed, I’m frightened. (Resident)

50


In the absence of demand, landlords felt thatthey had no option but to let to whoeverapplied. A concentration of large families withproblems in one estate was responsible for yearsof serious anti-social behaviour, which in theend caused even the most determined of long-standing residents to leave. The councilfollowed eviction procedures but these werelengthy – it took two years to secure the evictionof the most troublesome family and, althoughthey now live in another part of the city, theystill harass those who gave evidence againstthem. An injunction was obtained; the father ofthis family recently served a 28-day prisonsentence for ten breaches of it.

Blocks of one-bed flats in the area hadtraditionally been let to the elderly. As elderlytenants died (and in the absence of elderlyapplicants) the council let the flats to youngsingle people. The combination of young andold in an unsupervised, insecure environmentdid not work. The young tenants appeared outof control and the elderly were terrified.

People say if you put a rotten apple in the middle,it changes and becomes good. But that doesn’twork. It just clears the building. And it happensvery rapidly. When I was new in the job, I moveda young man into a block of six flats that had astable, elderly community who’d lived there foryears. Within five to six weeks, five of the flatswere empty. He was abusive. He tried to robthem. He had all his mates there too.(Council housing officer)

The housing associations continued to build,but often let their new accommodation topeople who were already resident in the area.As one council housing officer commented:

Forty-four housing association properties werecompleted nearby in 1995. I must have hadbetween 20 and 25 tenants, out of my patch ofabout 300, move into those properties.

Impacts/inputs

Residents

Abandonment problems aren’t uniformthroughout City-Edge. On at least three of thesix council estates, there remains a stable core ofresidents who have lived in their houses sincethe day they were built. These estates havestrong and well established tenants’ associationsor Homewatch schemes – formed in the mid-1990s in response to a deteriorating livingenvironment and community disintegration. Ontwo estates, there is not a single empty house.

Some residents have had enough. They’vetried to change things but the violence that theyhave faced, and their frustration at the delay inpublic intervention, has finally prompted themto try to move away:

If I thought, for one minute, I could make adifference, I would stay. (Resident)

People have seen their life’s investmentbecome virtually worthless:

One bloke has lived there for 50 years. He raisedhis kids in the property and it was a struggle forhim to pay off the mortgage. So he comes toretire, with this property behind him. He’s paid offthe mortgage – but it isn’t worth a carrot to him.And such a proud person who felt that when hepassed away he could pass that house to his kids.Well, his kids don’t want it. (Local councillor)

51

City-Edge

Relationships on the ground can be vital tomaintaining the confidence of residents. Newapproaches can help:

The improvement in allocations management bythe council means that existing tenants havemore confidence. They are no longer ‘panic-stricken’ about who will move in next doorbecause they know that it will be someonedecent. Before, people were so terrified aboutwho would move in, that they would be lookingto move away just in case. (Resident)

The system of the TA [Tenants’ Association]recommending people worked well on our estate.Through this practice, we increased the stabilityof the estate and the sense of community. Thereare four generations of one family living on theestate and three generations of another. We wantto encourage this. That’s what builds up thecommunity we want. (Resident)

Housing service

The high level of empty homes obviouslyreduces the housing department’s income. Thehigh turnover and need to secure emptyproperties increases costs. There are intangiblecosts, such as the effect on staff morale. Housingofficers are faced daily with the misery ofpeople being harassed and intimidated.Pressure to fill empties conflicts with the direconsequences of an insensitive letting:

As soon as people moved on to this estate theywere being robbed of everything they’d got. Youfeel responsible – I put them there and thishappened to them. It just completely blows yourmind. (Housing officer)

The housing service is up-front about its

failures, some of which frustrate residentsterribly:

We’ve been terrible in our management of thearea. What’s needed is all the basics – local patchofficers getting out and about, spotting thingsearly, being proactive. But it’s easier said thandone in an area like this. It all becomes too muchfor people and they get overwhelmed by it.(Council officer)

Housing staff should visit the people in thehouses more – and see what’s going on. Theyonly see you if there’s a problem. They shouldjust pop round and sort things out early on.(Resident)

Even the most dedicated and proactivehousing team cannot deliver a quality service onits own. The housing department set up aneighbourhood strategies working party inSeptember 1997, involving social services, thepolice, community groups, schools and others.This group has worked together on childsupervision:

Children from target families feel that theirbehaviour is being closely monitored by variousagencies … children were complaining of beingwatched from all sides at school, at home andwhen they were playing in the local area. (Council report, 1998)

Departments have traditionally worked inisolation and some services, by their verynature, come with different perspectives. The‘area overview’ role of housing and the‘individual advocacy’ role of social services canconflict when, for example, the eviction offamilies with problems is considered. Without

52


special follow-through, an eviction to solve ahousing problem can create a costly socialcasualty. The new approach is requiring a greatdeal of effort to implement in practice, bothbetween and within departments.

Schools

School numbers have fallen and some schoolsfear closure. High turnover also affects them.For example, in just a few months, one of theprimary schools lost 22 children but gained 18others.

The crime in the area can also affect schoolbuildings and grounds. In May 1998, one of theprimaries had 16 burnt out cars on its premiseswithin just three days (Council report, 1998).

Police

The police service is perceived very differentlyin different parts of City-Edge. Members of oneof the Homewatch schemes spoke highly of thelocal community police officer and of the closeworking relationship that had been established.Police and housing have also worked togethereffectively, although both see gaps. But, incertain parts of the area, police officers are notvisible on the ground:

I’m not anti-police, but the police manpower forthese areas is just a joke. (Estate agent)

Some residents feel let down by the police:

One night there were about 60 people gatheredon the corner of our street with ghetto blasters. Irang the police at 2.00 a.m., and they said to me‘What do you want us to do about it?’ (Resident)

Shopping

The shopping centre has declined steadily overthe past ten years:

You can almost test the temperature of thecommunity by how many shops there are, howmany disappear, what sorts of goods are beingsold. We’ve seen a gradual run-down of theshopping centre. The bank moved out in 1989/90.There is still a post office, but it’s not thriving.There are at least half a dozen derelict shops,whereas, in the early 1970s, they were all open.(Senior manager, social services)

Current options

A neighbourhood renewal assessment advisedclearance of Lower City-Edge. The statutoryprocess is not yet complete and there have beenobjections, but many owner occupiers arepleased, especially given the degree ofdilapidation that now exists:

Clearance is the only way forward. I just want toget out quick. (Resident)

Residents breathed a huge sigh of relief whenthey heard that the result of the neighbourhoodrenewal assessment was to recommendclearance. (Council officer)

The main housing association in Lower City-Edge has decided that there is no alternative butto demolish homes completed only eight yearsago, but surrounded by empty terraced houses.Already selective demolition of one-bed flatshas helped appearances. Demolition of some ofthe houses has proved less successful. Thehouses adjoining one demolition site are nowboarded up. The problem of too few people andtoo many houses remains, with the associateduncertainty, lettings dilemmas and extremepolarisation that are so damaging to City-Edge,

53

City-Edge

already at the bottom of the city’s housingmarket.

A large leisure development is being built onthe edge of the area, and this may bring jobs, anextension of the metro and new life for theneighbourhood. The city is proposing City-Edgefor a major regeneration initiative. Greatexpectations surround the new approach. Thisinitiative signals light at the end of the tunnel.Investment will need to be linked to sustainedbasic inputs – cleaning, repairs, tenantinvolvement, support for new tenants, carefullettings and co-ordination across services.

54

About the area

Riverview lies less than two miles from the citycentre; 30 minutes’ walk along the river. Thisarea has a long history of industrial activity,including coal mining, iron and chemical works,shipbuilding and related engineering industries.During the 1980s, key employers scaled downtheir workforces and eventually closedaltogether. With the support of the localauthority and the Urban DevelopmentCorporation, a technology park was created.However:

The few jobs that are around now are not suitablefor the unskilled workers from Riverview.(Regeneration manager)

Council housing dominates the area. Inter-war estates of two- and three-bed terraced andsemi-detached houses with front and reargardens were modernised from the 1970s,providing attractive, good quality houses. Post-war developments included houses,maisonettes, multi-storey and ‘scissor blocks’.Some were demolished recently because of theirunpopular design and low demand.

Why did they insist on building maisonette flats?– families on families. (Resident)

Housing associations own a small amount ofrefurbished and new-build property.


Riverview is divided into several distinct parts.Lower Riverview has always been stigmatised,because of its location near the now defunctheavy industry:

9 Riverview

When I was young, Lower Riverview was the‘lowest of the low’. I only went down there forChapel and Sunday School. There was nothingelse to go down for. It was a bad place. (Resident)

However, people used to have a reason forliving in Riverview; they had employmentnearby:

The relationship between houses, the communityand employment in the area was extremelyimportant. People would walk or cycle to workand the community was able to see what theywere building – it created an enormous sense ofpride. (Regeneration manager)

Once these links to local employment nolonger existed, the community began tofragment:

There has been an increasing number of singleparents, short-lived relationships and a shiftingpopulation which has a destabilising effect onestates. There are a large number of menwandering around different relationships leaving alot of unsettled and damaged people behindthem. (Senior council officer)

People became demoralised. Those who didfind employment tended to move out to becomeowner occupiers in nearby areas. The loss oflocal employment occurred at a time when itwas becoming much easier to enter owneroccupation:

It is not very expensive to enter owneroccupation: the cost per month is less than acouncil rent if you’re working. (Former resident)

The least popular housing, and those areasthat were already stigmatised, began toexperience demand problems. By January 1998,

55

Riverview

every fifth house in Lower Riverview wasempty:

People from outside won’t even come to viewthe properties here because of its reputation.(Resident)

Not enough people want to come and live inLower Riverview – it’s out of the way, at thebottom of the bank and it is overlooking an areawhere once there used to be local employmentbut is no longer. It is at the bottom of the peckingorder of local authority housing.(Regeneration manager)

Historical allocations policies that gradedpeople and areas contributed to that place in thepecking order:

A ghetto was manufactured. In the 1970s, theallocation process graded people A, B, C, D, or Z.Certain estates started getting a greaterproportion of Z-graded people. The area managerused to use it as a threat … and tell people that, ifthey didn’t pay their rent, they’d be rehoused inLower Riverview. (Council officer)

The slack in the system was furtherincreased by the development of 70 housingassociation homes in 1996:

This site became available for letting right at atime when demand was plummeting. It has had adisastrous impact on Lower Riverview.(Council officer)

However, this development was initiated bylocal residents and built on land previouslyoccupied by derelict factories which was an eye-sore. It illustrates conflicting political, financial,local and organisational interests:

The development of this estate originated frommeetings of parents at the primary school and theDevelopment Corporation encouraged it. Weknew it would create voids in the local authoritystock, but the council had no choice. Theycouldn’t have sabotaged a people-led enterpriseand couldn’t have said ‘no’ because of thepowers of the Development Corporation. In anycase, the council wanted people to think forthemselves and local members supported it.Obviously, housing officers were worried …(Local councillor)

More recently the demand problems havespread northwards, affecting the parts ofRiverview that had been regarded as morestable and less stigmatised. There are few emptyhouses, but turnover is high. Blocks of flats arecontinually being demolished.

The local authority sector has borne thebrunt of falling demand over the past ten years.However, older terraced private stock on themain road has suffered a rapid decline. ByJanuary 1998, 31 units were vacant out of a totalof 99:

Central Road went downhill very rapidly, just inthe last 18 months. There was a domino effect –people started leaving in their droves.(Community development officer)

The housing on this road had been nearly allowner occupied but, in a very short space oftime, houses and flats were transferred to theprivate rented sector. As elderly owneroccupiers died, private landlords bought uptheir houses:

There is evidence that social unrest has beenengineered by people who want to purchasehousing on Central Road at knockdown rates.

56


Owners are forced to sell and the new landlordsthen let to housing benefit claimants. (Senior police officer)

This has shocked local people:

Central Road used to be posh. Those were lovelyflats. It breaks your heart. I wouldn’t live in themrent-free now, but they used to be elite.(Resident)

Inputs/impacts

Residents

Riverview retains a number of tightly knitcommunities. Family networks provide a reasonfor people remaining in the area even thoughwork has gone. However, it can be off-putting to‘outsiders’:

The negative side of the sense of community thatexists is that it can be very parochial. Anyone bornmore than half a mile away is an alien. Anyonewho’s different in any way is not made to feelwelcome at all. (Council officer)

There are two tenants’ groups and a smallcore of committed activists. One groupsucceeded in saving a former social services daycentre from being demolished. With supportfrom the council, and from the SingleRegeneration Budget, it has since beenconverted into a community centre with anattached community development worker. Arange of groups and council services now usesit.

Residents were also instrumental inestablishing a community-run security project inLower Riverview, based in one of the towerblocks. It was set up in 1993 and comprisesCCTV, a 24-hour door guard, and a security

patrol. Action is co-ordinated with the housingservice and the police. The project employs localpeople:

Since the security project commenced, reportedcrime has fallen significantly. We have driven thebad people away. When the security project firststarted, there were more than 20 voids out of the85 flats in the tower. This has been reduced toseven. (Security project manager)

The local church has played an importantrole in supporting these community initiatives.

However:

The residents’ association needs to take LowerRiverview forward, but it has dwindled over thepast few years. It feels as though people don’tcare. (Resident)

As well as a stable core, there is a transientpopulation:

People move up the bank as quickly as they can –so there’s a constant change of people. (Youthofficer)

There are a small number of families whohave a disproportionately negative impact onthe area:

One notorious family was responsible for fiveyears of harassment, crime and burglaries. Theyestablished a little kingdom down there – it wascompletely wild. (Council officer)

There is a feeling that there has been a moregeneral shift in attitudes and behaviour:

The housing has got better, but the neighbourshave got worse. Before it used to be: ‘Don’ttouch that, it’s the council’. Now it’s: ‘Do wreck itbecause it’s the council’. (Resident)

57

Riverview

The serious unemployment which exists causes ablack economy, because people just can’tmanage on benefits. If they declared this income,they would lose everything because of thepoverty trap. But the realisation by youngstersthat their fathers have got to get by through‘fiddling’ is not helpful. (Local councillor)

Housing

The council is faced with a difficult dilemma. Itneeds to fill the properties, and neither local norcitywide adverts have had much success:

People with mental health problems have beenfoisted on housing and they’ve housed thembecause they’re under pressure to makeallocations with demand falling.(Regeneration manager)

People are aware that if you give up your councilhome today and your next place doesn’t workout, you can be offered somewhere else againvery quickly. This has the effect of devaluingcouncil housing. It’s a trap that we’re in. We’renot going to turn people away.(Senior council officer)

The housing department should vet new tenants.If they’ve been thrown out from other parts of thecity, why should we have them? (Resident)

However, the housing service has taken thison board with its deferral policy for peopleresponsible for anti-social behaviour. And it hasbeen a force for good – maintaining a presenceon the ground, addressing historical serviceproblems, working closely with the securityproject and the police, and continuallyattempting to halt the spread of voids. The back-up it needs from other council services is oftenlacking:

Housing is left out there as the last front-lineservice, underpinning housing demand andaddressing the lack of social cohesion. (Renewal manager)

It is not easy:

The situation is now beyond our control – despitetrying every trick in the book to reduce voids,including advertising. (Council officer)

Police

The police work closely with the housingservice and the security project. They alsoexchange information with probation, theschools and social services, and are activelyinvolved with the SRB programme. Crime hasbeen reduced through the proactive targeting ofpersistent offenders.

There is serious organised crime andpeople’s perceptions of crime are hard tochange:

Although the crime rate has fallen, there is aproblem of perception. The old and the vulnerablehave retreated. (Community co-ordinator)

In Lower Riverview, the problems and tensionsthat used to exist are no longer. But the name isstill a powerful negative. (Senior police officer)

Part of the police strategy is to talk positivelyabout the area. Youth initiatives include regularvisits to schools by a ‘youth issues officer’,police forums for 14–16 year olds and avolunteer cadet force.

Some residents argue that the police are stillnot visible enough:

We would like to see more police walking thebeat. (Residents)

58


Schools

All schools serve a very deprived population:

The long-term and growing unemployment hasundermined the social fabric of the area. Manystudents have reading ages over two years belowtheir actual ages.(Ofsted report of secondary school, 1996)

In a situation of high unemployment, it canbe hard to demonstrate the benefits ofeducation:

As a careers teacher, I could take pupils to theshipyards and they could apply for (and mostlyget) apprenticeships followed by jobs for life.Tremendous efforts are being made to encouragechildren to stay on at school – but it’s very hard ifthey can’t see any opportunity at the end of it all.(Secondary school head)

One primary school, in partnership withparents, pupils, governors and outside agencies,developed play facilities, a community wing (inwhich a range of courses are held), crèchefacilities and a community library. It runs aBreakfast Club, sponsored by local businesses.Sixty to 70 children attend this every day:

The school has to be more than a school in anarea like this. (Primary school head)

Departmental boundaries can be frustrating:

With a community that’s dying, where there’s nohope, you need a joint long-term approach, not asituation where everyone is working in littleboxes. I’ve spent ten years fighting these littleboxes to get the school where it is today.(Primary school head)

The school’s roll increased by 47 per centbetween 1982 and 1997. Other primaries in the

area haven’t fared so well, two having sufferedfrom falling rolls for decades.

Current options

Selective demolition of some council blocks hashad a positive impact on the private housingoverlooking them. The council will carry outimprovements to the remaining maisonetteblocks. In Lower Riverview, there may befurther selective demolition to remove the blightof empty homes. However, there is a dangerthat the ‘front line of the voids’ will creepfurther up the bank.

A regeneration programme is under way.The focus is on people, services, jobs andsupport, as well as on buildings. There will beenvironmental improvements rather thanredevelopment. Additional social housing is notwanted here:

There is something fundamentally wrong with theperception of council housing. It needsrebranding. (Renewal manager)

Most of Riverview is not yet locked intoabandonment. But Riverview is hovering on thebrink and, according to the senior manager,there is no waiting list at all for the area. If theexisting community can be persuaded to stay,then Riverview can survive for the time being.But the population is ageing and times havechanged. The old way of life depended on local,manual employment. New employmentopportunities will be vital to the social cohesionof the area and to give people a reason to live inRiverview. Whilst the drain from city estatesinto owner occupation continues, Riverview’sfuture hangs in the balance.

59

About the area

Although Valleyside is an inner city area, itcontains many open spaces and parks. Parts of ithave almost a ‘village feel’. It has goodshopping facilities, including a large Asda.

Valleyside has always been a working classarea. Most major employers left the areaapproximately ten years ago:

Without employment, the area is not sustainable.Unless you get these people back into work,you’re wasting your time. (Private sector officer)

Nearly 60 per cent of Valleyside’s housing isterraced. The pre-1919 houses are small,opening directly on to the pavement, withshared alleys at the rear. There are also eightlocal authority estates, built in the 1960s and1970s. One has been significantly redeveloped.Others suffer from poor design, a highproportion of flats and maisonettes, disrepair,unsupervised open areas and unkemptenvironments. Housing associations have beeninvolved in refurbishment of pre-1919 housingand have also built anew during the 1990s.


A demand problem only became visible acrossValleyside in the last three years, although someindividual estates have had high turnover sincemuch earlier.

Allocations policies during the 1980s andearly 1990s emphasised housing and social needto the exclusion of other applicants. The resultwas a high concentration of people who wereunable to cope on particular estates. Meanwhile,waiting lists dried up. Slack in the system meantthat people who wanted to leave could do so:

10 Valleyside

It took time for us to recognise the extent of thechange that was happening and to introducepolicies to counteract the detrimental effect ofthis. (Senior council officer)

Everyone who wanted to be let in to this estatewas let in. (Council officer)

All tenures are now affected by low demand.In nearby private terraces, approximately 20 percent of properties are empty; up from 5 per centjust two years ago. This overall figure masks thefact that there are stable, fully occupied streetsas well as streets which are virtually deserted.

A housing association developmentcompleted four years ago created more choiceand had the knock-on effect of further reducingdemand for the unpopular council stock:

Between 30 per cent and 40 per cent of thetenants came out of our council dwellings inadjacent estates … the stock is better designedand better laid-out. (Regeneration manager)

Poor management in the private sector hasadded to problems:

Low demand is to do with the way that landlordshaven’t been managing their properties, and theirlettings policy – or lack of one. (Resident)

As the population of the terraces growsolder, and the younger generation isincreasingly uninterested in buying suchhousing, the proportion of private renting willcontinue to increase. Areas have changedrapidly if elderly residents have died at aroundthe same time:

In our street we’ve got quite a high percentage ofolder residents. They get intimidated. If you gettwo or three problem families, the houses start to

60


deteriorate, the elderly move on and other peoplecome in of a similar character. It’s like a cycle. Ifone house gets empty and gets vandalised, veryshortly you’ll find another one goes the sameway. Over a short period of time, a quarter oreven a third of a street can die like that, quitequickly. (Resident)

Inputs/impacts

Housing/regeneration

One estate has been completely renewedincluding attractive new housing and renovatedtower blocks. The local authority confirms it hashealthy demand though it needs sustainedinput from staff and residents. According to thelocal housing officer, it is drawing tenants fromother estates. A bid to regenerate aneighbouring estate failed.

Private companies are building homes forsale, with subsidy from English Partnerships.This is being done as an ‘act of faith’ – in thebelief that demand will be generated bysupplying the right quality housing. Of the 169sales completed or reserved in the regenerationarea so far, 60 per cent have been to existing cityresidents (possibly stopping people exiting thecity). Forty per cent of sales are to incomers,who are being attracted to live in the city. So far,the homes are at the cheaper end of the marketand almost 60 per cent of sales have been topurchasers earning no more than £15,000 perannum (Council report, September 1998). Onecompany plans to build 250 homes inValleyside.

Work is ongoing to attract businesses intothe area, build up the local skills base and linklocal residents with employment opportunities.Regenerators are joining with youth workers to

include young people in this.Renewal of pre-1919 terraces is focused on

those parts of the area with the strongestresident interest. Until recently, housingassociations were using social housing grant toacquire and renew properties. Gradual renewaland selective clearance will continue.

The local authority has also focused onimproving conditions through intensivemanagement, setting clear standards ofbehaviour and enforcing those standards. Afurnished tenancy scheme has reduced emptyflats in multi-storey blocks. The council hasactively sought to redress past failures. It hasforged strong links with the police, as havehousing associations. However, the estatesuffering the worst demand problems in thearea has continued to deteriorate:

We’ve been trying to manage our way throughthe problems on this estate, because we weren’table to put in the capital investment that we didelsewhere. We’ve got very intensivemanagement there: allocations procedures withpre-offer checks. We’ve got an inter-agency taskforce, and we’ve shifted the crime and nuisanceoff the estate. But we have not made one jot ofimpact on demand. (Regeneration manager)

It’s not working. (Council officer)

The level of empty properties is a continualdrain on the housing service:

Empty properties drag the estate down andwaste a lot of time, energy and resources. A lotof money has been wasted keeping emptiessecure. (Council officer)

Housing staff were surprised when theycanvassed opinion about demolition on this

61

Valleyside

estate which was 35 per cent empty at March1998. Contrary to expectations, they found thata majority wanted to stay. This was despitebeing surrounded by empty houses; a few sobadly vandalised and decayed that entiresections of wall are missing, revealing theinterior of rooms.

Residents

There are strong communities in Valleyside:

Valleyside has got some very stable communitiesthat function and exercise social control.(Senior council officer)

There is a warmth in Valleyside – there is thiscommunity feeling. (Head teacher)

Residents have been instrumental in thechanged fortunes of the renewed estate. Theresidents’ association there was established in1985:

When you live in a community, you don’t noticewhat’s happening about you. You walk over therubbish, you pass the empty houses, you getused to your environment. For me, the initial pointwas when I was going to work one day and aused nappy came flying out of a flat and landed atmy feet. I stood there thinking; ‘God, this is whatwe’ve come to’. That was the starting point. Ithought; ‘Something’s got to be done’.(Leading resident activist)

There is also an unstable population:

We’ve seen an increase in the transientpopulation. (Resident)

Some residents feel disaffected:

There’s a lack of hope for some people … andthat pervades the area. (Resident)

There is a limit to how much people willtolerate, especially when there is plenty ofalternative housing on offer:

People do want to stay in the area, but they don’thave to live around empty properties – they don’thave to live next door to the local drug dealer –they can just get up and move somewhere else.(Housing association officer)

Schools

Some schools face closure because of surplusplaces, including a secondary which wasrecently refurbished at a cost of £1.2 million. Theroll of one of the primaries fell from 380 to 207between 1993 and 1998:

One of the biggest things we’re battling against ispupil numbers. (School governor)

By the end of Key Stage 2 (aged ten–11), out of aclass of 25, only half have been here from thebeginning. (Primary school head)

One of the primaries has had a drive toimprove attendance and to reach out into thecommunity. The head is keen to get parentsinvolved in education themselves, in the beliefthat they will then attach greater importance totheir children’s attendance and progress:

So many of our parents condone absence fromschool. If parents have been through the systemand they’ve not come out with this feeling of theimportance of reading and learning having a valueof its own, how can they impart that to theirchildren? So we’ve got a breakfast club, we’veresurrected the parent-toddler group and we’veopened up the school for adult education classes.(Primary school head)

Initially, there was a significant

62


improvement in attendance and punctualitybut, as the year has gone on, this has droppedoff. However, the initiatives have beensuccessful in involving more parents and a PTAhas been set up.

Police

The police service has adopted a joint-workingapproach, with the housing service, the localschools and social services. This has increasedthe co-operation of the community and otherservices:

There was a period of very poor relationsbetween the town hall and the police, whichstarted in the early 1980s. If I got someinformation about someone dealing drugs in alocal authority property and I wanted to knowwho lived there, I’d be told that they don’t co-operate with the police. Now, housing actuallybring information to us. (Senior police officer)

The crime rate has gone down, mine is one of thequieter beats. (Police officer)

There is still a perception of high crime:

Some people think they are living in the depths ofhell. (Council officer)

Some intimidation does not involve anyoneactually committing a ‘crime’:

The younger generation – kids running round thestreets, causing nuisance –has the biggest effecton people … together with drugs.(Senior police officer)

The empty properties can be a target forchildren to vandalise:

In some ways, it’s like a playground for kids. Oncethey get a door off, it’s an adventure.(Police officer)

Current options

There is a great deal of regeneration activity inValleyside. One estate has been completelyremodelled, private housing is being selectivelycleared and improved, and, most significantly,private developers are building housing for sale(albeit at the lower end of the market and withsubsidy). People from outside the city, as well asexisting residents, are being attracted into thisstock. The crucial test will be whether this newowner occupation is sustained.

There are 125 acres of development land inthe regeneration area. It is close to the city centreand the metro will be extended to the area in thenext three years. There are, therefore, significantopportunities for job creation and furtherhousing developments for higher incomehouseholds. There is political support for thisstrategy. Valleyside has a better chance thanother inner city areas of being ‘saved’,repopulated and ‘depolarised’:

If you’re pessimistic about Valleyside, you’repessimistic about every single inner city area inthe country. The problems will be solved. But it isnot going to happen overnight.(Senior council officer)

Alongside the large-scale, dramatic buildingprojects, there needs to be continued intensivesupport to the existing communities in both thesocial and private housing:

We need good publicity for the area and for theschool. We need private landlords to market theirproperty – with a very strict lettings policy. Wewant people who are going to be committed tothe area and committed to maintaining theproperty. (Resident)

63

Valleyside

Ultimately, hope hinges on economicregeneration of the area and the city – givingpeople a reason to live in Valleyside, and toinvest in the area both economically andsocially.

Part IV

The causes and consequences of decline

67

In this part of the report, we try to set thepopulation and job losses in Manchester andNewcastle in the wider context of urban changeand decline. We link the local fortunes of thefour neighbourhoods to inner city clearance andestate building. We then look at governmentand local regeneration attempts within aglobalising economy that treats cities likeManchester and Newcastle particularly harshly.

In abbreviating and simplifying history, werefer the reader to detailed sources.

Pre-World War I

The roots of abandonment are tangled. Thedepopulation of cities in Britain has beenvirtually continuous since before the First WorldWar (Thompson, 1990). Core areas started todepopulate even before the end of thenineteenth century when railways madecommuting possible and Britain lost itsindustrial mastery of the world (Briggs, 1983).By 1900, 80 per cent of the population wasurbanised and the pressures to decongest citieswere intense. The vast majority of workingpeople in England were living in single familyterraced houses, mostly solidly built, openingon to paved streets, with piped water. Thishousing form was a sign of our relativeaffluence compared with our continental andScottish counterparts who were often living inhigh density tenements (Burnett, 1978). But thedensity was huge compared with today – 40dwellings to the acre, six people to a household,at least 240 people to an acre, but rising to 400 inpoor city neighbourhoods.

Often, strong support networks developed

in these areas, some based on kinship, some onmutual aid principles amongst groups ofworkers (Thompson, 1990).

Inter-war years

‘Coronation Street’ neighbourhoods went intorapid decline between the wars when a vaststock of new suburban housing was built, muchof it for working people (Burnett, 1978;Holmans, 1987).

Rents were tightly controlled except whenre-let to new tenants and nineteenth-centuryinner city housing decayed rapidly (Holland,1965). The total supply of homes jumped fromseven million to 11 million in 20 short years,much of the increase going to first time,working class owner occupation, as well as tocouncil housing. Suburbs spread and councilscreated ‘peripheral estates’ for the first time(Daunton, 1987). People began to be pushed outof the old terraces by slum clearancedeclarations that in the 1930s rose to one-and-a-half million although only a quarter of a millionwere actually cleared before the war (Holmans,1987). Households shrank to an average of threepeople as the number of homes and householdsmultiplied. This rapid process ofdeconcentration was abruptly halted by WorldWar Two.

Post-World War II

An ambitious plan to build new estates, newtowns and new neighbourhoods was born ofwar-time solidarity. In order to deliver Utopianestate plans, it was essential to clear two million

11 The long roots of the problem –

history not news

68


surviving nineteenth-century slums. Thesecolossal and costly projects blighted every majorinner city in Britain from the early 1950s rightup to 1980 (Burns, 1963; Power, 1987). Between1931 and 1978, city populations plummeted, inspite of continuous rebuilding. Aneurin Bevan’sdream of recreating English and Welsh villageswas corrupted into large monolithic, singletenure, single class estates (Foot, 1973; DoE1977; Power, 1987). The blight on inner cityneighbourhoods, often lasting 30 years or more,destroyed not only many establishedcommunities, but also many jobs and services(Young and Wilmott, 1957; Maclennan, 1997;DoE, 1977). There was in fact a deepcontradiction between the gains of the masshousing programme in dwellings andamenities, and the upheavals it caused(Dunleavy, 1981).

Urban depopulation

City depopulation was caused by strongerforces than clearance and mass construction ofcouncil estates, important as these were.Britain’s slow economic decline relative to NewWorld and German expansion from around 1870turned world famous industrial nerve-centresinto over-sized ghosts of history (Briggs, 1983).Rent controls encouraged private landlords tolet inner city property fall into disrepair, leadingto withdrawal. The 70-year slow boom in owneroccupation continuously sucked working andmiddle class families out of cities into suburbanand smaller settlements (Saunders, 1990); butalso led to gentrification of older, inner cityhousing. According to F.H.L. Thompson,dominant owner occupation at the expense ofprivate renting confirmed Britain as a less

mobile society with more class rigidity thanother wealthy societies (Thompson, 1990).

The outward movement of jobs and peoplewas actively encouraged from 1930 to 1975 withthe aim of reducing overcrowding, cleaning upcities and planning orderly settlements. Someindustry in cities like Newcastle was forced out.This reinforced industrial decline and economicrestructuring. Thousands of monofunctionalestates, stripped of noisy, dirty workshops andcheap corner shops, were built as dormitoriesfor the families of mainly male workers(Community Development Project, 1976).

Severed networks

Large-scale compulsory purchase was seen as aprerequisite for city renewal even when houseswere structurally sound and there was stronglocal resistance (Crossman, 1975). Millions ofunmodernised Victorian and Edwardianterraces were targeted by government. Someescaped and were modernised, many did not(Ferris, 1972).

New housing estates were reserved for thevictims of clearance, the ‘slum dwellers’. Theslow emptying, boarding up and disconnectionof services turned previously thriving, if poor,neighbourhoods into a sea of dereliction(Hamilton, 1976; Konttinen, 1983). In otherEuropean cities, demolition was much moreselective and more mixed-use neighbourhoodshave survived (Power, 1993).

The forced rupture of old neighbourhoodswas occasionally fought off (Hamilton, 1976).But, on the whole, the ‘Family and Kinship’story was replayed in maybe 5,000 compactinner city neighbourhoods, as established socialnetworks were destroyed and forced

69

The long roots of the problem – history not news

communities in new areas often failed to takeroot (Wilmott and Young, 1957). Large tracts ofinner Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham,Newcastle, Glasgow, Tower Hamlets and otherurban centres were virtually wiped out between1955 and 1975. Nearly five million people werecompulsorily moved (Halsey, 1988). Liverpoollost one-third of its population in the process.Birmingham had a continuous clearance area of35,000 properties.

The idea that people could be reordered outof slums into new estates did not work.Government took no responsibility for the socialupheavals and dislocation that inner citydemolition and rebuilding caused (CHAC, 1949,1953a, 1953b 1955a, 1955b, 1956, 1959, 1969;HSAG, 1978). The informal networks of supportthat are well documented in low incomesettlements world-wide were swept away and ittook years to rebuild them (Habitat, 1996; Youngand Lemos, 1997).

Surplus estates

Estates appeared – sometimes almost end onend as in Tower Hamlets, Southwark, northLambeth, south Hackney, inner Liverpool, theEast End of Newcastle. Many of these newcouncil areas had become hard to let by theearly 1970s (DoE, 1974). The Government wasfirst alerted to the problem when councils beganadvertising vacancies. There were boarded upflats on many large, difficult to let Londonestates – the GLC advertised in the Evening

Standard and let over the counter (GLC, 1979;DoE, 1981a). Islington had several estates whereit simply couldn’t find families to move in(Hamilton, 1976). Demolition of structurallysound blocks began and continues today.

The problem was much more severe in theNorth. Newcastle forecast in 1976 that it wouldhave a surplus of council housing by 1983 if itkept building (DoE, 1981a). Gatesheadcouncillors in 1975 recommended a halt tocouncil building but the recommendation wasrejected for fear of being overtaken byneighbouring local authorities. Liverpool,Birkenhead, Knowsley, Wigan, Blackburn,Oldham, Rochdale and many other areasreported serious demand problems by 1980.Lewisham council in London declared it hadenough council housing in 1976 (DoE, 1981a).

By 1980, over half the housing stock of mostinner London boroughs and nearly half thestock in most major cities was council-ownedand rented. Councils came to dominate cities ina way that had not been clearly foreseen andwas unique in Western Europe (Power, 1993).

Estate management

The lack of management structure or expertisein running the now publicly owned areas led tomajor gaps (DoE, 1981a). For example, thepolice did not accept responsibility forpatrolling estates as ‘private areas withunadopted roads’ (Islington Borough Council,1976). Council housing management was notregulated, unlike other public services, and theresulting standards were very poor (CHAC,1969; HSAG, 1978; Glasgow District Council ,1986). The management task was made muchharder as new generations began to grow up inworkless households (DoE, 1981b). The derelictdocks, warehouses, factories, terminals all nowblighted the very estates that they hadgenerated in their heyday.

70


Bias to renovation

By 1974, under pressure of growing objections, ashortage of suitable sites and cost, few newclearance areas were being announced.Renovation restored some of the popularity ofold inner areas. In the early 1980s, it was easierto let a Coronation Street house than a brand newflat in Liverpool (DoE, 1981a). In Islington, theshift away from demolition saved manycondemned Georgian squares from thebulldozer and drew in younger households whootherwise would not have stayed in innerLondon. The housing was cheap, accessible andfar more spacious than modern ‘rabbit hutches’and it became highly attractive (Ferris, 1972).This movement gradually spread across innerLondon and other cities. Glasgow began torecognise the intrinsic value of its old tenements(Donnison and Middleton, 1987).

Government funding shifted in favour ofinner city renewal. But, in spite of GeneralImprovement Areas (1969), Housing ActionAreas (1974) and Urban DevelopmentCorporations (1981), all aimed at restoring cities,the decline continued. Rather than too little, toolate, the rescue of cities was a long-term projectin the face of radical economic and socialtransformations.

Global shifts

International competition, the freeing up ofmarkets and investment led to the collapse ofailing British industries – textiles, steel, coal,shipbuilding, car manufacture and many others.Cities like Manchester and Newcastle were evenharder hit in the 1980s by the complex processesof globalisation than in the earlier decades of

slow decline (Economist, 1998). If public buildingprogrammes resembled an unstoppablejuggernaut and inner city renewal a stuntedCinderella, economic change was like a tidalwave, swamping whole communities, sweepingaway jobs and sucking out the energy and life-blood of whole areas.

The break-up of ‘municipal fiefdoms’

The main obsessions of the 1980s became theexpansion of owner occupation and thereduction in the scale and power of urban localauthority landlords (Forrest and Murie, 1988).The hope was that a more private, morecompetitive orientation would generate moreenterprise. Government policy did not ignorecities, even though councils were no longer themain house builders, nor the principleregenerators (Robson, 1995).

Michael Heseltine’s attempt to entice privateinvestors back into inner cities after the Brixtonand Toxteth riots met with a luke-warmresponse. Government had to pump-primevirtually all the new inner city housing,renovation of older property and theinfrastructure for inner city renewal (AuditCommission, 1989). Tenants’ disillusionmentwith conditions was used as a weapon to leverchange out of local authorities, although thissometimes backfired as in the case of the firstHousing Action Trusts (Malpass and Means,1993).

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, a battery ofinitiatives was tried – at one point, there were adozen simultaneously targeted at inner cities.Most had some impact on conditions. Inparticular, the Urban DevelopmentCorporations, one for every major city, created

71

The long roots of the problem – history not news

flagship centre city renewal projects that beganto attract new jobs and new residents. They arean interesting case of mixed use, mixed fundingpartnerships which cities over time came to beproud of. But they were too glamorous and tooexpensive for poorer and more extensive innerneighbourhoods.

Rescuing estates

Estate Action targeted repair and environmentalfunds at about 500 estates. Housing associationswere encouraged to build new and infillschemes in place of local authorities. But nocoherent or concentrated action was taken overthe long-run decline of inner neighbourhoodsuntil City Challenge was launched with thereturn of the hard-hitting Heseltine to attackmultiple and highly resistant problems withmultiple action (DoE, 1996). In spite ofsignificant visible impacts, under 30 areas werein the programme; they were short-lived (fiveyears) and therefore insufficient to turn the tidein the areas we visited.

The last major Conservative initiative was topool all city programmes, distribute the moneyas widely as possible through the SingleRegeneration Budget and thereby lower thepriority given to cities. This lower commitmentwas linked with rumbling disorder in manyestates and inner areas. In the early 1990s, therewere over a hundred disturbances and at least28 riots, mainly outside London and the SouthEast. There was a clear link between loss ofwork, loss of a male breadwinner role,aggressive male behaviour and weak policing(see Power and Tunstall, 1997 for furtherdiscussion). These riots were local affairs,

provoking no inquiry and no new policies.Among the most severe were the riots in GreaterManchester (Salford) and Newcastle.

The numbers game

Meanwhile, house building continued. Housingassociations entered their fastest growth period,mainly new stock in inner city estates where itwas cheap. Government targets encouraged thenumbers game and economies of scaleencouraged estates. Lower costs encouragedallocations of funds to the North and thespectacle of unwanted new developments inmany northern inner cities began.

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, between150,000 and 200,000 new homes a year werebuilt, mostly for owner occupation, mostlyoutside the cities on greenfield sites, possiblystaying slightly ahead of the rate of householdformation (House of Commons, 1998).

Councils had undergone 20 years of harsh,negative, downward pressures. Their status andtheir estates were often in bottom place. In bigcities, where municipal landlords were mostdominant and in deepest trouble, the knock-oneffects on the city as a whole were significant(Pacione, 1997).

By 1995, there were constant press reports ofvandals destroying newly built, unoccupiedhouses, of half-empty estates, of demolitiondecisions and of plummeting demand (seeAppendix 8). Table 36 shows how these broadsocietal and economic changes affected lowincome neighbourhoods, fuelling the urbanexodus.

72


Table 36 Impacts of wider changes on local neighbourhoods

Wider urban and societal changes Local inner city and neighbourhood changes

Industrial decline/job change Highly concentrated impacts of large-scale changesCity exodus and North/South drift Acute poverty and job lossesDecline in social housing popularity Council estates become stigmatised

Clustering of problems Empty propertyLower standards of service High turnoverFalling densities Low value propertyDeclining reputation of cities Lower entry requirements

Interlocking problems ‘Left behind’ populationPoor schools, security, environment High unemployment/low skillRising demand in more popular areas Plummeting demand and abandonment in unpopular areasSettlements leapfrog beyond urban fringe Local controls deteriorate

Anti-urban bias Neighbourhoods caught in vicious spiralFeeds neighbourhood decline Feeds anti-urban prejudice

↔

73

There are three main pressures militatingagainst the survival of the poorestneighbourhoods including the four we studied:

• first, the intense social and economicpolarisation of the poorest areas leadingto the prospect of chaotic conditions, ashappened on some council estates in the1970s, 1980s and 1990s (Power, 1997;Power and Tunstall, 1997)

• second, the dominance of councilownership in cities and the mismatchbetween area tenure and the strongaspiration to choose and to own

• third, the strong lure of suburban andrelatively low cost owner occupationleading those who can buy to abandonpoor inner neighbourhoods and fuellingthe exodus.

The social face of cities has been graduallytransformed (CPRE, 1998; Rudlin, 1998). Thepeople left behind in the process, descendants oftraditional working class communities andnewcomers to the urban scene, occupy oldneighbourhoods that have become all butunrecognisable. Table 37 illustrates the push and

pull factors. Figure 7 illustrates the long patternof urban decline.

Both Manchester and Newcastle have beenhard hit by sprawling greenfield building. Yet‘land is a finite resource and we cannot afford tobe profligate with it’ (Raynsford, 1999). It is stillcheaper and easier to use greenfield thanrecycled inner city land. However, if the fullinfrastructure, social and economic costs ofgreenfield development were included,brownfields would be more attractive.

No government department is responsiblefor monitoring the building targets that arebeing set or the planning permissions that arebeing allowed. Unitary Development Plans,produced by every local authority, are notscrutinised for consistency. Nor are theyregularly updated. The statement withinNewcastle’s Plan that the city still suffers fromhousing shortages and too high densitycontradicts available evidence (Newcastle CityCouncil, 1998c, DETR, 1998b).

We now link the pressures and trends wehave explored to the experience of our innerneighbourhoods. The factors affecting them aregrouped under six main headings.

12 Driving factors

Table 37 Push and pull factors in the abandonment of inner neighbourhoods

Push factors Pull factors

Unpopularity – low value Desire to upgradePoor services, particularly education Escape from inner cityAccelerated decay High premium on securityUnpredictability Desire for peaceful environmentDemoralisation, despair Pro-suburban biasLow income/poverty Higher value neighbourhoodsSense of loss of control – insecurity Affordability – cheap owner occupationAggressive, disruptive behaviour Ready supply outside cities

74


Reputation

The reputation and history of the areas broughtwith them lasting problems. From the outside,the old slum areas were stereotyped as crime-ridden, ignorant and unruly (Wohl, 1977). Muchof this reputation carried over into the councilestates that replaced them (DoE, 1981a). Astimes changed, people sought constantly toleave, upgrade and improve. Thus, tied into thehistory of poverty was a history of instability.

Poor areas often had a much more positiveside – a strong sense of ‘community’ in the old-

fashioned sense, gritty almost defiant pride inwhat had been the very base of England’sindustrial wealth. Difficult conditions generatedan instinct for survival and close familynetworks (see case studies). These positiveelements helped people to cope with thestruggle at the bottom but they did notovercome the harsh industrial legacy. The senseof solidarity within the community was often anattempt to fight back at a social order that reliedon large groups being at or near the bottom.Overall, the lowest income communities were

City decline

Exit of skilled population

Growing poverty, de-skilling

Suburban owner occupation gets cheaper – more space – better amenities

Social housing stock continues to expand (to 1983)

Estates lose popularity

Poorest estates become marginal

Politicians ‘in denial’ – inadequate response

Worst areas damage city image

Greenfield developments to hold population

Inner areas collapse

Figure 7 Cumulative urban decline leading to collapse in neighbourhood conditions

Source: Based on European Urban programmes; Power, 1993.

75

Driving factors

battling with weak rather than strong levers.This was accentuated as traditional institutionssuch as unions, churches and friendly societieslost members and their cutting edge(Thompson, 1990). The transformation of work,requiring different and higher skills, hasreinforced this problem, making muchtraditional education in low income areasunprepared and as yet unable to generate newstandards and skills sufficiently fast (Blunkett,1998).

As neighbourhoods shrank and lost theiremployment base, so the negative image of anarea became stronger, generating a sense ofshame. It is easy to become depressed when therationale for a community is lost – ‘when workdisappears’, and conditions deteriorate (Wilson,1997). Thus, history and reputation becomeattached to the people who are identified withan area and its problems (Gauldie, 1979).

In spite of this, some residents were deeplycommitted to their neighbourhoods workingtirelessly for the good of the community. Theyhad not given up hope, but they recognised thedownward pressures on their neighbourhoods.In particular, they were distressed by thenegative behaviour of many younger residentsand some families. They felt this compoundedthe poor reputation and betrayed all theystruggled for:

One or two kids were holding the estate toransom and it got a bad name. It crept up on us.(Resident, City-Edge)

Housing and environmental conditions

The economy, housing and environment interactstrongly but with a time lag. As jobs go, so

people filter out to new housing built in growthareas. More anchored and traditional residentsoften do not want to go. The environmentdecays as economic shifts continue, creating asense of dereliction.

There is a singular absence of any overallenvironmental plan for the areas. It is theconfusion of open spaces, derelict land, emptybuildings, lack of trees, loss of an ordered senseof urbanity that so stigmatises the mostabandoned areas, making them look uncaredfor, unvalued and unwanted.

Regeneration initiatives definitely improvethe image of the targeted areas by upgradingthe environment, but often they are too short-term, too capital intensive and too disruptive ofthe existing population, leading to furtherpopulation movement (see case studies) and anabrupt loss of momentum at the end of eachspecific programme (Robson, 1995).

Areas need long-term management ofconditions, with people on the groundconstantly checking, supervising, mending,clearing, guarding, controlling, linking,listening. Little of this activity is funded throughprogrammes of intervention, or through localauthority mainstream services. Earlier studieshave highlighted this need (Carley and Kirk,1998; Gregory, 1998).

Overall, there is far too strong an emphasison physical regeneration and building, and toolittle sense of what might make areas ‘tick’again. The truth must lie in some combinationof physical and social spending, capital andrevenue programmes.

76


Empty demolition sites, empty

council homes and empty shops

77

Driving factors

Building for a surplus or gentrification?

Neighbourhood abandonment leads to a fight tocounter the decline. Hence, new, low costhousing is going up in the very streets that havebeen cleared for lack of demand. No one yetknows whether the new housing will take rootand new residents will stay. But only bystemming the wider flow out of cities willdemand for these areas rise again. This has notyet begun to happen.

There are some hopeful signs. Better qualityhousing close to the city centres is selling betterthan predicted and there appears to be demandfor more (Manchester and Newcastle, 1998;Rudlin, 1998.) Appealing to higher income,younger working households with new-stylecity flats and town houses offers one wayforward for areas that are quite literallyabandoned by traditional employers andresidents. The quayside along the Tyne israpidly being claimed by developers on theback of the Urban Development Corporation’sinvestment in the 1980s/90s (Newcastle CityCouncil, 1998b). The old warehouses of centralManchester offer spacious and attractive ‘loftapartments’ that are selling for 40 times theprice of a terraced house only a mile away.(Manchester City Council, 1998d). These highquality developments are having a knock-oneffect on the image of city housing and on thestandard of services offered.

The benefits have not yet hit the neighbour-hoods we studied, but they are sometimes onlyminutes away and they symbolise a shift inthinking. What was formerly rejected as a hatedindustrial relic is being ‘gentrified’. Developersare building modest but attractive homes foryoung incomers in two of the neighbourhoodscreating the beginning of more mixed, more

balanced areas. Trickle down theories are stronglydisputed but cities are dynamic vehicles and thedirection of change does affect both poor and rich.The new dynamics may be more pro-city andtherefore indirectly pro-poor. The involvement ofprivate as well as public partners signals thenew opportunities (Urban Splash, 1998).

Management pressures

The management problems generated byconditions of incipient abandonment are littleshort of overwhelming. Some councils, afteryears of over-bureaucratic, rule-bound,procedure-driven systems, are ready to pushout all the boats in precarious neighbourhoods.Local staff, local offices, local lettings andresident links are now commonplace in morego-ahead areas in response to the real urgency.However, these moves are often not backed bylocalised budgets, direct control over servicedelivery or sufficient local decision-makingpowers (Power and Tunstall, 1995). Themanagement structures are often not strongenough to stem the tide. As a result, reallyradical experiments only rarely emerge.

However, tough enforcement on crime andanti-social behaviour appears to be having someeffect. The introduction of concierges into blocksof flats is restoring viability to some previouslyhalf-empty blocks. Localised staff appear tocontain spiralling conditions and win somebattles (see case studies). But, unless there ismore demand, management energies may beleeched away. One of the requirements ofsuccessful management is to get many elementsright together (Power, 1997; Gregory, 1998;Social Exclusion Unit, 1998). Management onlyworks over small areas, yet a co-ordinated effort

78


Quayside development, Newcastle upon Tyne

79

Driving factors

REVITALISING INNER CITIES

Source: Urban splash

Old Haymarket, Liverpool

Britannia Basin, Manchester

80


over large areas is essential. Getting thiscombination of highly localised inputs andbroader city strategies to work together ishighly elusive. Both Manchester and Newcastleare battling with these dilemmas (seeAppendices 6 and 7).

Disrupted communities

Social problems dominate the consciousness ofall who live and work in inner neighbourhoods.Tenants are constantly trying to move awayfrom the edges of estates where they might beexposed and vulnerable, or the middle wherethey might feel trapped and forgotten. Thus,strips of empty property keep growing. Manypeople – residents and staff – talked about theproblems at night when no one was around.People referred to gangs, criminals and roughbehaviour. This sense of dread is real, but it isdifficult to judge how many people are involved– probably a small minority, even though it issufficiently aggressive to swamp counter trends:

There is a massive problem with an over-supplyof housing. It has wrecked communities. They arenow unsustainable. This part of the city is just achoice of bad areas to live in.(Former HA development worker, Bankside)

One explanation for the growth of neighbournuisance and behaviour breakdown is thegrowing concentration of difficult people in ashrinking stock of public housing. A singlefamily can wreak havoc where there is space inwhich to operate:

One ‘wrong’ person moves into a street, and thewhole street empties. The perpetrator stays, thevictim moves. (Resident, Bankside)

Abandonment and high turnover make thatminority even more conspicuous. In the controlvacuum that often arises as the stablepopulation declines, behaviour that might havebeen contained spills over:

We had eight abandonments in the course ofthree to four weeks. Five of those were on thesame street and were mainly to do with thisproblem family vandalising the area andthreatening people. They were wrecking ourproperties as they became empty. So we had toput up screening which made the street lookworse. Even then, they were pulling the frontporches off and setting fire to the gas meters.One tenant has had bricks thrown through herwindow. Members of this family have punchedpeople in the street.(Housing association officer, City-Edge)

Disruptive behaviour like this affects localschools. Some children react aggressively to theviolence and destruction they see around them.

Other social problems are quieter – lowincome, lack of work, lone parenthood, forexample. But they actually feed into disorder atthe extreme, because residents have fewerresources, lower morale, weaker links and lessback-up with which to make things work. Theyalso become depressed more easily anddepression readily converts into aggression –particularly among young men.

It appears impossible to sustain socialcohesion when large areas have become almostuniversally poor in a wider context of growingaffluence. Both cities advocate an income andsocial mix within the inner city as the onlyeffective counter to the mounting socialproblems (Manchester and Newcastle, 1998).Residents often agree:

81

Driving factors

Some people think you should just start all overagain and attract in much higher income peoplewho could make it work. (Resident, Bankside)

But spreading rather than concentratingproblems is easier said than done. Newsupports and new initiatives to integratemarginal households have to be constantlycreated (Shelter, 1998). Manchester’s originalstrategy to combat anti-social behaviour incouncil housing through evictions, injunctions,witness support and other enforcementmechanisms is both popular and contentious.On the ground, it is strongly defended.Enforcement often leads to improvement. Thesignals sent out by setting clear boundaries cancontain behaviour.

Cumulative crisis

We observed the phenomenon of ‘tipping’ fromviability to unviability as areas go into a steepslide and problems reach breaking point. Someparts of all four areas became unsaveable. Thekey measures of tipping were zero demand,property abandonment and the decision toallow demolition by managers and residents.Power, energy, resources and authority allbecome so depleted that, over a short period,many elements of viability collapse. No one anylonger has a grip on conditions. Figure 8summarises the process of ‘tipping’.

Figure 8 Tipping point in neighbourhood decline

Tipping point

Long-term decline

Accelerating costs

Loss of confidence

Zero demand

Property abandonment

Zero value

Demolitions

Depleted energy, resources

Loss of authority/control

Collapse in viability

Part V

A way forward

85

The following section examines the prospectsfor inner neighbourhoods in the face of long-rundecline. We link the historic problems of citieswith the climate of positive change that we alsoencountered.

The counter-pressures

Most parts of the neighbourhoods we visitedhave not yet reached tipping point. There aremany efforts to save these neighbourhoods.

• Constantly renewed regenerationinitiatives and other special programmesunderpin the survival of inner areas.Even where they are inadequate orunsuccessful, they express a commitmentto cities that over time may win backsome lost ground. Almost all exampleswe describe make some difference, atleast to the potential of neighbourhoods.

• Localised housing services are bit by bitameliorating some conditions andresponding to immediate problems. On-the-spot repair and environmental careare critical to success in such difficultareas.

• Local policing initiatives are drivingdown crime in some areas and creating amodel of policing that is more sensitive,more focused and more visible on thestreets.

• Efforts by local schools help to counternegative reputations, behaviour andperformance. Where they link parents into the educational and community effort,they are doubly effective.

• Local church members and leaders cangenerate community support and positiveaction.

• More open marketing of availablehousing is encouraging applicants whomay contribute to a more stable socialenvironment. Careful vetting andscreening to prevent disruptivehouseholds is an essential part of thisprocess. Residents’ knowledge can helphere.

• Constant involvement with localresidents encourages them to stayinvolved and keep up hope. It providesinvaluable information and is a vital partof any strategy to stabilise and restoreinner areas. It is far easier to attract newinvestment and new mixed incomedevelopment when there are somelonger-standing residents defending thearea (Power, 1997).

• Many other initiatives are required, someof which we found on the ground, somewere missing; particularly youth andfamily projects, employment and trainingprogrammes, ground level care-taking,guarding and custodial maintenance.New Deals for Work and for Communitiesare designed to tackle these gaps.

• Long time-scales are needed to turnaround such deep-set problems – 15 or 20years (Social Exclusion Unit, 1998).

Co-ordination increases effective action suchas joint police, housing and resident strategiesto tackle drug dealing.

13 What can be done?

86


The measures we found in place oftencountered or slowed the downward trends andin some areas seemed to contain the worstproblems:

Our residents’ association was set up becausewe wanted to tackle what we saw as the areabeing left to deteriorate. I decided that the areawas worth fighting for. (Resident, City-Edge)

No one agency has the answer or the capability todeal with the problem … it’s so massive that weall need to work together.(Secondary school head, Bankside)

Table 38 summarises those micro-actionsthat cumulatively prevented the collapse thatmany feared.

Social exclusion

The term was invented in France in the early1980s to describe people cut off from work andother support. It has become a catch-all phrasefor poverty and related social problems. Itresonates in Britain where polarisationincreased rapidly in the 1980s (Joseph RowntreeFoundation, 1995). Social exclusion has quicklyrisen to the top of the political agenda.

New patterns of work are driving thesechanges in post-industrial economies (Reich,1993; Marris, 1996; Wilson, 1996). Olderindustrial centres are harder hit than morediverse, service-based, ‘modern’ areas(Jargowsky, 1997). But, in Britain, all large citiesand most sizeable towns experience problems ofsocial exclusion. It is a product of manypressures and changes working together topush more disadvantaged people to the edge ofsociety, often preventing them from partici-pating and depriving them of opportunity. The

least popular council estates and poor innercities are particularly strongly affected becauseof their historic role in housing a manualworkforce (Social Exclusion Unit, 1998). There isno one pattern of decline, as some cities andareas have coped and responded better thanothers.

Social exclusion is associated with theghettoisation of people and areas. Tackling innercity problems and rebuilding cities moregenerally is a key to creating social cohesionbecause pro-urban policies work against thedevelopment of social ghettos.

We have a strong legacy of universalunderpinning through the Welfare State ineducation, health and social security. Thisunderpinning is still remarkably intact (Hills,1998). It provides vital bridges between all areasand all citizens. Area programmes depend onthem. The new government is targeting themost deprived areas with intense initiativesbased on universal programmes. New ideasdraw on earlier experience of successfulregeneration (Robson, 1995; DETR 1998c,1998d). This should help inner cityneighbourhoods.

Many of the new government Action Zones,the emphasis on education and health, the crimeand disorder measures, the supportive approachto families, and targeting the worst areasthrough New Deal for Communities aredesigned to combat social exclusion (PrimeMinister, 1998). The bundle of benefit and taxreforms announced by the Chancellor in 1998helps to move low income households closer tosolvency and in the direction of integration(Hills, 1998). While these measures are nationalpolicies, they are applied regionally and locallyto create local responsive programmes.

87

What can be done?Ta

ble

38

Lo

cal

act

ion

in

fo

ur

ne

igh

bo

ur h

oo

ds

to h

old

co

nd

itio

ns1

Hou

sin

g

Loc

al o

ffic

eL

ocal

lett

ings

Scre

enin

g le

ttin

gsFl

exib

le le

ttin

g, e

.g. u

nder

-oc

cupy

Con

cier

ge in

tow

er b

lock

sFu

rnis

hed

tena

ncie

sE

stat

e ag

reem

ents

Ad

vert

isin

gSe

lect

ive

dem

olit

ion

Mod

erni

sati

onL

ight

ing

Fenc

ing

Ext

erna

l upg

rad

ing

Lan

dsc

apin

g of

cle

ared

site

sE

stat

e re

mod

ellin

gTe

nure

div

ersi

fica

tion

Eng

agin

g pr

ivat

ela

ndlo

rds

LA

sec

urin

g pr

ivat

eem

ptie

sA

ctio

n on

enf

orce

men

tL

ink

to e

mpl

oym

ent

Mul

ti-l

and

lord

link

s

Res

iden

ts

Res

iden

ts’ a

nd te

nant

s’as

soci

atio

nsH

omew

atch

pro

ject

sL

inks

wit

h po

lice

Cre

dit

uni

onC

omm

unit

y d

evel

opm

ent

Mon

itor

ing

hous

ing

and

envi

ronm

enta

l ser

vice

sIn

put i

nto

allo

cati

ons

Neg

otia

ting

est

ate

impr

ovem

ent

Ass

ista

nce

in s

ecur

ing

empt

ies

Cam

paig

n fo

rin

trod

ucto

ry te

nanc

ies

Pol

ice/

secu

rity

Loc

al p

olic

ing

Spec

ial l

iais

on w

ith

resi

den

tsL

iais

on w

ith

othe

rse

rvic

esW

itne

ss s

uppo

rtC

omm

unit

y sa

fety

stra

tegy

Yout

h in

itia

tive

s, e

.g.

volu

ntee

r ca

det

forc

e,sc

hool

link

s,d

iver

sion

ary

wor

kTa

rget

-har

den

ing

Clo

sed

cir

cuit

tele

visi

onC

rim

e pa

tter

ns a

naly

sis

Safe

r E

stat

es in

itia

tive

Ars

on ta

sk fo

rce

Secu

rity

pro

ject

incl

udin

gpa

trol

s by

gua

rds

Sch

ools

Bre

akfa

st c

lubs

Lun

ch-t

ime

club

sPa

rent

invo

lvem

ent

Ad

ult e

duc

atio

nA

nti-

trua

ncy

mea

sure

sA

nti-

bully

ing

mea

sure

sIm

prov

emen

ts to

sch

ool

build

ings

Ext

ra in

puts

for

tran

siti

onfr

om p

rim

ary

tose

cond

ary

Pare

nt li

nks

Wel

fare

sup

port

Hea

lth

Res

ourc

e ce

ntre

Loc

al p

harm

acy

Hea

lth

proj

ect i

nclu

din

ggr

oup

for

stro

ke p

atie

nts

and

thei

r ca

rers

Men

tal h

ealt

h aw

aren

ess

trai

ning

for

fron

t-lin

est

aff

Supp

ort g

roup

for

dru

gus

ers

Sp

ecia

l res

ourc

es

Est

ate

Act

ion

Cit

y C

halle

nge

Sing

le R

egen

erat

ion

Bud

get

New

Dea

l for

Com

mun

itie

s

Vol

un

tary

orga

nis

atio

ns2

Sett

lem

ent

Chu

rch

acti

onN

eigh

bour

hood

wat

chC

omm

unit

y se

curi

typr

ojec

tsC

omm

unit

y Tr

ust

Hou

sing

co-

oper

ativ

eC

omm

unit

y ce

ntre

Food

co-

oper

ativ

e

Em

plo

ymen

t3

Trai

ning

, ski

lls,

dev

elop

men

tO

utre

ach

Job

link/

job

sear

ch/

job

prep

arat

ion

Wor

k ex

peri

ence

Em

ploy

er li

nks

Com

pact

sIn

war

d in

vest

men

t/ne

w jo

bs

Cro

ss-s

ervi

ce w

ork

ing

Com

mun

ity

plan

ning

Polic

ing

wit

h ho

usin

g st

aff

and

res

iden

tsC

hild

sup

ervi

sion

Fam

ily s

uppo

rtA

nti-

soci

al b

ehav

iour

1N

ot a

ll ac

tion

is ta

ken

in a

ll fo

ur n

eigh

bourho

ods.

2O

ther

vol

unta

ry o

rga

nisa

tion

s ar

e lis

ted

und

er o

ther

hea

din

gs.

3O

ften

insu

ffi

cien

t loc

al ta

rget

ing.

88


Table 39 summarises the programmes,powers and proposals for tackling urban andneighbourhood problems currently in train.They are divided between national, regional,district and neighbourhood policies andapproaches. At neighbourhood level a clearframework does not yet exist (see section on‘Neighbourhood management or strategicvision?’ later in this chapter).

Marketing social housing

Social landlords so dominate rental housing incities that a broad strategy of rehousing variedsocial groups is vital in helping cities to recover.Cohesion depends on a sense of belonging, linksbetween neighbours, support networks andinformal controls (Young and Lemos, 1997).Most people attach high importance to living in‘a good area’. These essentials become elusivewhen only the people with the least resourcesand most difficulties are rehoused together in asmall area without intensive support,particularly when there is a sense of coercionand loss of control.

The strict emphasis on rehousing tenantsaccording to need has destroyed the socialviability of much council housing and may dothe same for housing associations. It has alsoover time excluded people who might want torent and who would stay in cities if they could.

The problem of needs-based allocations asthe only access route to estates is recognisedacross the country. Our evidence shows that theresult is lettings problems in high pressure areaslike London as well as the Midlands, West andNorth (see Appendix 1).

As demand for social renting has fallen,

there is a golden opportunity to try newapproaches. Active marketing of good quality,relatively cheap housing attracts a broaderrange of applicants than are currentlyconsidered eligible (GLC, 1979). It will makedifficult to let but good condition areas morepopular as long as many other external andlocal supports are in place. This approach wassuccessful in the 1980s in some of the mostdifficult estates (Power, 1984, 1991b). It isunlikely to attract more than a few affluentapplicants. But about half the population shouldbe eligible on a broader definition of need.

Access can be organised on continental linesto help ensure a greater social mix. In Denmark,anyone who wants to can apply for socialhousing and a strong mixture is encouraged inorder to retain public support and prevent‘ghettos’ of poor people. A quarter of lettings goto emergencies. In Germany, a majority rent;about 60 per cent of the population is eligible for‘social’ housing, a loose term for all subsidisedhousing. In France, some social housing istargeted at acute need, but a majority is formoderate income households looking for ahome, a very general interpretation of need(Power, 1993). In Holland, all social lettings areadvertised to ensure broad access on theassumption that many people want anaffordable home in cities near work. Manchesteris currently advertising widely for its wholestock. Within steeply declining neighbourhoods,advertising among relatives, friends and othersconnected with the area is often a crucial firststep. Some previously unpopular tower blocksin the neighbourhoods have been successfullyfilled through advertising coupled with specialsecurity and screening measures.

89

What can be done?

Pro-

city

pro

gram

mes

Bro

wnf

ield

focu

sU

rban

tran

spor

tU

nive

rsal

und

erpi

nnin

g•

Ed

ucat

ion

•H

ealt

h•

Soci

al s

ecur

ity

•Pu

blic

infr

astr

uctu

re a

ndse

rvic

es•

New

Dea

l for

Wor

kR

edis

trib

utiv

e gr

ant t

o lo

cal

auth

orit

ies

for

urba

n se

rvic

esSp

ecia

l ini

tiat

ives

•SR

B•

Act

ion

Zon

es–

Ed

ucat

ion

–H

ealt

h–

Em

ploy

men

t•

Sure

Sta

rt•

New

Dea

l for

Com

mun

itie

sL

egis

lati

ve r

efor

m p

ropo

sals

•L

ocal

gov

ernm

ent

•C

rim

e an

d d

isor

der

Soci

al E

xclu

sion

Uni

t•

Rou

gh s

leep

ing

•Tr

uanc

y an

d s

choo

lex

clus

ion

•D

isad

vant

aged

neig

hbou

rhoo

ds

•Yo

ung,

lone

par

ents

Reg

iona

l eco

nom

icd

evel

opm

ent

Dev

elop

men

t pla

nsG

reen

bel

t pro

tect

ion

Cit

y d

evel

opm

ent

Reg

ener

atio

n pr

ogra

mm

esR

egio

nal c

o-or

din

atio

n an

dre

pres

enta

tion

Res

ourc

e d

istr

ibut

ion

Reg

iona

l tra

nspo

rtR

egio

nal c

hang

e, h

ousi

ngin

vest

men

t and

pla

nnin

g, e

tc.

Ad

min

istr

ativ

e ar

m o

fgo

vern

men

t•

Stan

dar

ds

•E

nvir

onm

ent

•Ta

rget

ing

Lan

d u

se, r

ecyc

ling,

bro

wnf

ield

stra

tegy

Trai

ning

and

ent

erpr

ise

dev

elop

men

tR

egio

nal D

evel

opm

ent

Age

ncie

sE

xpan

ded

reg

iona

l gov

ernm

ent

(Sco

tlan

d, W

ales

, Nor

ther

nIr

elan

d, p

oten

tial

ly E

nglis

hre

gion

s)

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

dem

ocra

cyL

ocal

gov

ernm

ent

Eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent

Serv

ice

co-o

rdin

atio

n an

dst

rate

gic

visi

on fo

r d

istr

ict

Loc

al c

ond

itio

ns a

nd s

tand

ard

sB

est v

alue

impl

emen

tati

onL

ocal

env

iron

men

tal p

rote

ctio

nE

nfor

cem

ent

Res

pons

ibili

ty fo

r ed

ucat

ion,

othe

r se

rvic

esC

hild

car

e/so

cial

ser

vice

sSt

rate

gic

inpu

t int

o po

lice

and

heal

th a

utho

riti

esC

rim

e au

dit

Traf

fic

and

tran

spor

tL

ocal

dev

elop

men

t pla

nB

row

nfie

ld ta

rget

del

iver

yO

wne

rshi

p an

d m

anag

emen

t of

coun

cil h

ousi

ngA

lloca

tion

of c

ounc

il ho

usin

gan

d n

omin

atio

ns to

hou

sing

asso

ciat

ion

dev

elop

men

tsSt

ock

tran

sfer

Reg

ener

atio

n st

rate

gyPa

rtne

rshi

ps in

spe

cial

prog

ram

mes

Priv

ate

sect

or li

aiso

n

Nei

ghbo

urho

od c

o-or

din

atio

nN

eigh

bour

hood

man

agem

ent

Loc

al h

ousi

ng m

anag

emen

tL

ocal

pol

icin

g an

d s

ecur

ity

Loc

al e

nvir

onm

enta

lm

aint

enan

ceO

pen

spac

esL

ocal

sch

ools

and

sch

ool

liais

on –

pla

y ce

ntre

s,co

mm

unit

y, a

dul

t, pa

rent

supp

ort

Oth

er s

uppo

rt s

ervi

ces,

e.g

.so

cial

ser

vice

sYo

uth

wor

k an

d a

dul

ted

ucat

ion

Lei

sure

act

ivit

ies,

hol

iday

prog

ram

mes

, aft

er s

choo

lac

tivi

ties

Nur

seri

es a

nd c

hild

car

ed

eliv

ery

Res

iden

t con

sult

atio

n an

din

volv

emen

t/lia

ison

Est

ate

agre

emen

ts/

tena

ntm

anag

emen

t/es

tate

foru

ms

Mul

ti-s

ervi

ce p

artn

ersh

ipE

nfor

cem

ent o

f sta

ndar

ds

Loc

al d

eliv

ery

poin

t for

all

serv

ices

and

pro

gram

mes

Tab

le 3

9D

iffe

ren

t le

ve

ls o

f g

ov

er n

me

nt

pro

gra

mm

es,

po

we

rs a

nd

pr o

po

sals

lin

ke

d t

o d

isa

dv

an

tag

ed

ar e

as

Nat

ion

alR

egio

nal

Dis

tric

tN

eigh

bou

rhoo

d

90


Polic

y A

ctio

n Te

ams

add

ress

ing

dis

adva

ntag

ed a

reas

Pres

sure

s on

per

form

ance

•B

est v

alue

•A

udit

com

mis

sion

regu

lati

on/

insp

ecti

onE

nvir

onm

enta

l age

nda

Loc

al A

gend

a 21

Fron

t lin

e fo

r lo

cal g

over

nmen

tin

itia

tive

sZ

ones

Cri

me

prev

enti

onPr

o-ci

ty a

nd p

ro-

neig

hbou

rhoo

d p

lans

Ant

i-po

vert

y an

d in

clus

ion

Loc

al c

onsu

ltat

ion

Nei

ghbo

urho

od in

itia

tive

s

Geo

grap

hica

l loc

atio

n fo

rm

ost s

peci

al in

itia

tive

sTa

rget

ing

mec

hani

smN

eigh

bour

hood

and

com

mun

ity

plan

sL

ocal

reg

ener

atio

n in

itia

tive

s

Tab

le 3

9D

iffe

ren

t le

ve

ls o

f g

ov

er n

me

nt

pro

gra

mm

es,

po

we

rs a

nd

pr o

po

sals

lin

ke

d t

o d

isa

dv

an

tag

ed

ar e

as

(co

nti

nu

ed

)

Nat

ion

alR

egio

nal

Dis

tric

tN

eigh

bou

rhoo

d

Not

e: M

any

of th

ese

prop

osal

s ar

e no

t yet

rea

dy

for

impl

emen

tati

on, p

arti

cula

rly

at n

eigh

bour

hood

leve

l.

Polic

e an

d h

ealt

h au

thor

itie

s(o

ften

org

anis

ed a

bove

loca

lau

thor

ity

leve

l)

91

What can be done?

An obvious argument against open lettingsis that they might create more homelessness.Squeezing needy households, however, in theeyes of potential and existing residents, raisesthe value of social housing which is aprerequisite for making estates work.

It is possible to reserve up to half of newlettings for social housing for emergencies inorder to prevent homelessness whilst the restcan be let through a constantly updated, opendate order queue without the discretion,discrimination and sense of coercion thatattaches to ‘merit’ systems, such as points. Thisapproach was recommended 30 years ago in thegovernment review of council housingallocations by Cullingworth, but was neverimplemented, a tragedy of short-sightednessfrom which council housing never recovered(Cullingworth, 1969). Cullingworth’s committeestressed fairness, equal access, an open systemand the avoidance of ghettos.

Mechanisms are necessary to ensure accessto better property for lower income householdsand to prevent higher income groups benefitingfrom windfall gains. Restrictions would benecessary to prevent Right to Buy profiteering,inherited secure tenancies and unfair priorityfor the most sought after properties. Table 40outlines some positive and negative lettingsmechanisms.

A second argument is that the governmentshould not subsidise better-off tenants to live inlow rent council homes. But the counter-argument is that working rent payers will helpto keep up the value and viability of socialhousing. More housing demand will createmore competition, and put different pressureson landlords and tenants. But some householdsin work have been unnecessarily put off renting,

and social renting in particular, creating widerpressures and costs exemplified by urbansprawl. The positive effects may far outweighthe negative and the alternative of allowingareas of exclusively low income housing to beprogressively abandoned, even by needyhouseholds, is the most damaging andexpensive option of all. This is happeningnationwide (Power and Mumford report to theHousing Corporation, 1999).

Allocating housing without choice to thepoorest people fits uneasily with modern urbansociety. It creates a high refusal anddissatisfaction rate. Restrictive, narrowly needs-based allocations, particularly one offer only tohomeless families, causes an increase in refusalsand a higher level of empty property. Thisapproach has been most damaging in largeflatted estates. The level of empty property insome London boroughs has been exceptionallyhigh because of this failure (Power and Tunstall,1997). Less precarious tenants are needed tocreate more mixed, stable estates. There is thespace in less popular areas to do it, but socialhousing generally should be opened up in orderto ensure its long-term survival. Table 41suggests some measures to make this work.

Nothing could be more costly than socialghettos as the US experience has demonstrated.They drive away more affluent populationsleaving the poorest, most discriminated againstpeople marooned in a sea of dereliction (HUD,1997; Vergara, 1997). If opening up allocationscreates more demand for social housing, thennew styles of affordable housing and multipleaccess routes will have to be invented.

Some people argue that the notion of ‘social’housing itself should be abandoned and weshould create a more diverse ‘regulated rented

92


sector’. This implies the continued transfer ofcouncil housing to ‘registered social landlords’to encourage more diversity, investment,resident commitment and businessmanagement. An obvious first step is to movehousing ownership and management out of thepolitical arena, so that all landlords have anincentive to run their housing as a long-termasset (DETR, 1998e).

Regeneration

Targeting ‘worst first’ is normal regenerationpractice because the worst areas blightsurroundings, destroying urban environmentsand reputations. Some areas may eventuallybecome redundant and demolition becomesinevitable, but this has to happen within abroader strategy of holding conditions in

One offer only policiesHomelessness as dominant access routeOpaque points systemNo clear position in queueNo guarantee of reaching top of any listMember interventions and special pleadingLack of internal transfersUnaccompanied viewingsPoor cleaning and redecorating of property on

offerLack of local ‘settling’ supportNo clear control over impact of lettings on

specific areas

Open waiting list and letting proceduresAll lettings advertisedBroad eligibility, e.g. below average incomeChecks on basic eligibility and suitabilityDate order queueTransparent priority access for emergenciesTarget lettings for clear priorities, e.g. statutory

homelessClear, simple definition of needCareful management of lettings in precarious

areasNo Right to Buy for new tenants in high

demand areasPayment of nominal administration fee (similar

to college applications)Automatic annual update deleting non-

respondentsDiscretionary restrictions to prevent abuseSpecial support mechanisms for rehousing

vulnerable familiesSpecial housing provisions for special needs

householdsOpen transfer system in date order queuingSimple eligibility requirements for transfer of

clean rent record and property conditionsLocal control over matching of applicant and

dwellingPersonalised introduction to tenancyClear, simple tenancy conditionsSettling in via local office, super-caretaking

Table 40 Lettings approaches

Damaging lettings approaches Ingredients of open access to social housing

93

What can be done?

precarious areas. This means planning andspreading capital investment, repair andenvironmental care across inner cities, not justwithin short-term regeneration programmes.Recognition of long-term needs is provokingstock transfer plans in many cities. These nowplay a growing part in regeneration (DETR,1998c).

Regeneration can work only in the context ofwinning back more people in work and withhigher skills – they are essential toneighbourhood vitality, entrepreneurship andinvestment. The need for local services to meettheir aspirations in turn generates mixed uses.Work then begins to find its way into thepattern of neighbourhood recovery. The

transitions of the post-industrial era are alreadycreating many new style jobs which lowerskilled people can do (Sassen, 1998).

The quayside developments in Newcastleand the canalside warehouse conversions inManchester, levered into existence withregeneration funds, demonstrate this new urbanapproach (DoE, 1997). It is unlikely to be truethat lower income households are excludedfrom the benefits of these developments, butproactive local and national governments helpensure inclusion.

Crucial to the success of regeneration isdeveloping basic skills and capacity buildingamong local residents. Most regenerationprogrammes recognise this (DETR, 1998c,

Table 41 Landlord mechanisms for retaining residents and attracting incomers in low demand areas

Management mechanisms Linking with residents

Careful management of allocations– Relaxed approach to transfers within area– Support for rehousing relatives and locally

connected applicants– Resident liaison

Systematic consultation over problems andpriorities– Constantly adapting actions– Constant feedback on progress– Priorities in liaison with residents– Local improvement budgets

Special initiatives with partners– To engage and involve young people– To build skills and generate jobs particularly

among younger residents– To support families in difficulty– To integrate different groups

Gradual improvements and upgrading– Medium- and long-term plan for overall

rescue– Neighbourhood management– Revenue resources

Strong local presenceWell motivated, supervised local staff – at least

one per 100 rented dwellingsImmediate action on basic conditions – cleaning,

repair, wear and tearConsistent legal enforcements against criminal

activityMeticulous attention to detail – highly localised

responsesDay to day liaison and reporting between

residents and staffSpecial management measures to support new

lettings initiatives, e.g. students, flat sharers,elderly

Links between open marketing and locallettings

Close liaison with police, education, socialservices, youth, environmental services

Intensive caretaking of large blocks, e.g. towersand general environmental care

94


1998d). It is a subtle and often elusive taskrequiring highly localised and sensitive inputs(Richardson, 1997).

To do all this requires a strongly led localauthority, less involved in hands-on detail, moredynamic in promoting neighbourhoods,partnerships, local regeneration companies andnew initiatives. The public landlord role may actas a barrier to fast change. Table 42 shows howsuccessful regeneration projects evolve.

Some regeneration will happen on its own inmore desirable areas but most needs pump-priming, social infrastructure andenvironmental upgrading. There is a strong linkbetween city-wide planning, resource allocationand neighbourhood action. Most importantly,the brownfields focus will work only in an evenplaying field.

Interestingly, developers are ahead of thegame – pioneering core city conversions,proposing inner renewal schemes andcapitalising on untapped demand from higherincome groups to return to the city. They rely onpro-city investment from national, regional andlocal government. In Manchester andNewcastle, developers are actively looking foropportunities within regeneration programmessuch as New Deal for Communities (NewcastleCity Council, 1998f). Lenders need to be drawnin behind this new interest in regeneration(National House-Building Council Conference,1998). Newcastle’s challenged appeal to thegovernment to build executive homes in thegreen belt may falter. The infrastructure costs tothe city are huge and developers may be willingto consider expanding outwards from thesuccessful city centre developments, as analternative to developing beyond the city’souter ring (Newcastle City Council, 1998d,

1998e, 1998f).Housing associations are heavily involved in

regeneration already as our case studies show.They can borrow to upgrade existing localauthority stock under transfer to new company-style structures. Associations have to take muchof the financial risk, alongside privatedevelopers, if they want to build new housing.But they can help to renew and diversify innerareas; particularly estates crying out forinvestment.

In spite of the emergence of ‘gatedcommunities’ in the United States, with somepale imitations in Britain, cities as well asvillages thrive on mixture. It is one of the mostattractive aspects of city life that people of manydifferent backgrounds and experiences share acommon space. Making those common spaceswork is a central role of civic society.

The government has tried many routes toregeneration over three decades. The experiencegives us clues to successful ingredients, many ofwhich are built into the new regenerationprogrammes, as Figure 9 summarises (Robson,1995; DETR, 1998c, 1998d).

Holding on to residents

Residents who have put up with so muchshould benefit from any gains of regeneration.This is central to social cohesion. Constantlydispersing communities undermines thepossibility of restoring a sense ofneighbourhood, and residents who understandhow things happen locally are a strong guide topriorities.

Holding on to long-standing residents helpsto stabilise rapidly declining areas. A cleansweep fits ill with the more successful city

95

What can be done?

Table 42 Stages in developing neighbourhood and district regeneration strategies

Overview of local, city-wide and regional problemsCommunity and political pressuresSelect target areas

Press reportsHistory of areaOfficial and local reports, meetings, Census, records

Bite-sized stepsThink the unthinkable

Target specific areasCost optionsSet out timetableDesignate pump-priming budgetIdentify troubleshooter

ResponsibilitiesWritten agreementsLeadership

Bid for cashMinimum/maximum requirementsInternal/external bidding

Options in light of resourcesBaseline plan for the neighbourhood managementAllow for variations

Functions, goals, powers, responsibilities

To fill in detailTo chase deliveryTo lead implementationTo clarify decision makingTo appoint board

Balanced representationResident involvementStrong independent chair

Identify fast, deliverable targetsConsult widely in areaRecruit local steering group

Core problems – caretaking, etc.Skills/job linksYouth/police/schoolsTraining, employment

Local informationResident input

Adjust planIntroduce new ideas

Long-term management not exitRenegotiate, reallocate, adjust resources

Identify broad problems

Collect evidence

Analyse problems and possibilities

Plan action

Negotiate partners

Identify resources

Revamp plan

Identify delivery team

Appoint ‘supremo’

Appoint board

Move to action

Focus on resident priorities

Monitor activity/spending/results

Evaluate

Extend action

96


neighbourhoods (Jacobs, 1970). We have arguedthat the best urban regeneration embodiesexisting assets within a new dynamism. Thiswas a main lesson from Estates on the Edge

(Power 1997). Chaotically decliningcommunities were rescued and conditionsreversed, with existing residents forming thecore of restored communities. Many specialsupports were introduced to help families in

difficulty. Manchester has introduced innovativeapproaches to this problem. An organicapproach, responding to the priorities of stableresidents, quelling their fears and meeting theirneeds, can improve conditions radically. A stilloccupied area with some slack is easier todevelop than an abandoned area where signsabound of complete collapse. Table 43 showsthis approach.

Figure 9 Essential lessons of regeneration

Strong leadership

A locally based team, withclear budgetary reponsibilityand decision-makingA long-term commitment

t o m a n a g i n g a n dsupporting the area

Focus on attractinga social mix

Creating mixeduses

Employment generationlinked to local strategies

Public–privateco-operation

Bottom-up planninginvolving residents andall other main actors

Highly visible environmentalimprovements, prioritised anddefended by local residents

Special initiatives to involveyoung people, particularly inenvironmental improvements

Developing new skillsamong residents so thatwork becomes an option

Multi-service partnershipsto draw everyone into aco-ordinated strategy

97

What can be done?

Density

In British urban history, we confused thepoverty and chaos of early urban growth withhigh density. In order to address poorconditions, we drove our cities outwards. In themass housing era, we built high-rise blocks inan attempt to reduce overcrowding, create moreopen space, cope with green belt restrictionsand objections to council housing in moreconservative suburbs (Dunleavy, 1981). Byconcentrating poverty within council estates, wecombined high rise and high need (Power,1987). This, coupled with lack of adequatecaretaking or guarding, led to rapid decay.

In practice, high quality is often associatedwith high density. Old crowdedneighbourhoods in Rome, Paris, Barcelona,Madrid, Edinburgh are sought after andsuccessful. Population density in Barcelona’sinner neighbourhoods is at least ten timeshigher than in British inner cities (Urban TaskForce, 1999a). Georgian terraces in inner

London, Glasgow and Amsterdam are very highdensity.

Higher density is making a comeback(Travers, 1998). When control over entrances iscombined with careful allocations, tower blocksprove popular, secure and relatively easy toregenerate. This is drawing public attention(Guardian, January 1999).

Smaller households and city exodus meanthat less people occupy urban space. It istherefore possible to increase the number ofhouseholds living in cities without crowdingpeople. Smaller households can be morecompactly fitted in, to generate sufficient streetlife and support services for new housing toreally work.

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’sinnovative proposals for high density, highquality rented accommodation in central Leedsand Birmingham point to new thinking ondensities, single person housing, super-caretaking and city living (Best, 1998). The

Save, reuse and renovate all adaptable buildingsAvoid large-scale clearances wherever possible

Avoid random demolition

Involve residents in planning action

Constantly amend and adapt plans

Focus on viable communitiesWork at edges of area – boundaries with better

conditionsEncourage resident involvementMaximise local back-up services

Modify building forms and usesRespond to resident objections to demolitian

and amend plansRestrict demolition to selective blocks or small

areasAvoid blueprint, open action planning within

clear strategyPut strong leadership into overall

environmental and social planningReinforce positive resident actionBuild links to centre

Strong local managementGive signals of constant care

Table 43 Organic, incremental regeneration

Action Implication

98


Peabody Trust, historically associated with highdensity and intensive secure management, ispioneering new schemes following this model(Peabody Trust, 1996–98).

A secret of success in creating mixed urbancommunities is higher density. Social housingcan be built into new development invisibly, ifwe copy the Dutch example of quality designand finish. These new styles rely on choicerather than coercion (National House-BuildingCouncil Conference, 1998; Urban Splash, 1998).

High density supports services, street lifeand interchange. Low density encourages theopposite, a sense of emptiness, a lack ofinformal controls, an inadequate resource basefor essential services and a deep sense ofinsecurity. Low income makes all these thingsmuch worse. Having sufficient people tosupport shops, to fund custodial caretaking, touse public transport creates informalsupervision through street activity. But acombination of neighbourhood managementmeasures is necessary to make density work.The continental model of urban maintenance isfar stronger and more effective than Britishmodels partly as a result of higher density. Itapplies in owner occupied as well as rentedareas.

The new core city private developments inManchester and Newcastle are similarly highdensity, well serviced, environmentallyattractive, in strong demand (Manchester CityCouncil, 1998d).

Now is the time to change planningguidelines as a way of enhancing the urbanenvironment, expanding the number of peoplewe can house in cities, reintroducing front-linesupervision.

Household size and formation

Eighty-five per cent of all additional householdsover the next 20 years are projected to be singlepeople. Fifty per cent of them may needaffordable housing (Holmans, 1995).

Households are breaking up and reformingin many new ways. This generates some of theprojected smaller households, although theelderly form a large proportion of them. Butfamily break-up also creates reconstitutedhouseholds, pulling many people who becomesingle into new partnerships and cutting-backthe rate of household growth. This is oneexplanation offered in both cities for lowerhousing demand, less new household formationand higher turnover than expected. It isimportant, therefore, not to rely too heavily onprojections but to look at hard evidence of localdemand and need more directly (Keenan, 1998).

Many more single elderly people will requirehousing within reach of main services in thefuture. Cities and towns will play a big role.Inventing new housing ideas to help singlepeople feel less isolated and closer to support iscritical to social cohesion. Ensuring family-friendly cities is too.

New factors can influence behaviour. Forexample, commuting becomes less popular astraffic congestion grows. Some working mothersare opting in favour of cities to avoid long-distance commuting and loss of child contact.City centres become more attractive to somechildless households as they become morenumerous; resistance to building in thecountryside grows as more green fieldsdisappear; rebuilding inner neighbourhoodsbecomes more attractive to the private sectorunder positive urban management. Household

99

What can be done?

behaviour is already responding to some ofthese signals as John Prescott’s own response toenvironmental pressures illustrates (DETR,1998b).

Shrinking household size makes many of thehouses and flats we saw standing emptypotentially attractive to new households as longas overall environmental security, back-upservices and neighbourhood management areprovided.

Policing

To win popular support for a return to cities inthe face of deep insecurity and long-run decay,more is required than marketing, regenerationand a change in attitude. A prerequisite is a newapproach to policing.

One of the reasons for behaviouralbreakdown is the unequal policing of areas.Weak enforcement highlights this (Power andTunstall, 1997). Over decades, the policeincreasingly withdrew into patrol cars andcentral offices. On the other hand, the police areexpected to broker the ills of society withoutclear rules. In a democracy, we want it bothways – freedom to choose how we live andfreedom from the consequences.

Gradually, it is becoming clear that manylevels of control by many agencies make formore peaceful communities. Strict enforcement,clear visibility on the streets, constant links withparents, co-operation with other authorityfigures, a swift response from localorganisational bases and immediate action oversmall transgressions can stem a rising tide ofmore serious crime. These measures help tocreate a climate of confidence and security thatreinforces people’s willingness to step in.

Crucially, positive or proactive policingencourages positive community behaviour.

Many liberals dislike the notion of intensivepolicing. But, in cities of strangers – which is theessential nature of modern city neighbourhoods– the brokering of law and order by recognisedauthority figures is a prerequisite forcommunity safety and stability.

Policing difficult neighbourhoods carriesmany risks and requires skill, continuity andconsistency. Young people, particularly youngmen, react with hostility and aggression topolice intervention after they have been allowedto develop law-breaking habits. However, theytend to respect clear rules that allow them theright to be out and about within the bounds ofcivic responsibility. This is where crowdedstreets, mixed uses, high density and strongpolicing can work together. They give youthsthe right to roam and gather as they havealways done, without threatening communitysafety.

There are many models of security,guarding, policing and community safety thatwork. Some are illustrated in our report. Often,they apply to small areas for a limited timeperiod. It is a question of applying widely andcontinually across city neighbourhoods what isknown to work. The resources currently spenton crime-chasing and paper-pushing must beconverted into crime prevention through streetpolicing.

Many US cities have cut their violent crimeby adopting a visible street presence and actionagainst ‘incivilities’ (HUD, 1997). Our muchsmaller crime problems are certainly moremanageable. Making urban dwellers feel‘comfortable and not alone’ is an absolute key toregeneration.

100


Anti-social behaviour

As policing and security are enhanced, mostforms of behavioural breakdown will shrink inproportion. Tougher enforcement in both citiesis beginning to achieve this. But some peopleare so disturbed, so unhappy, so sick and out ofcontrol that they literally cannot help disruptingother people’s lives. Some argue that there hasbeen a fundamental erosion of our social fabric,particularly in inner cities, that many people arebeyond normal help and, left alone, can onlysurvive in a self-destructive, violent way(Davies, 1997). There may be some truth in thisfor a small minority. They must be protectedfrom self-damage and communal havoc. Someinstitutional care is essential.

Formal community care arrangements canalso work in less serious cases. Much care cancome through informal supports and ‘lighthanded’ warden-assisted homes. Theintroduction of foyers and close supervision oftower blocks are examples we found of this new,caring approach in Newcastle. In Manchester,compacts with residents’ groups are succeedingin holding the line on anti-social behaviour invery difficult areas.

The approach that always fails is housingvulnerable and unstable people within the mostprecarious neighbourhoods because there isspace. It is an easy, short-term but self-defeatinganswer that local managers must have power toresist. Preventing the rehousing of unstablepeople was found to be a key to stabilisation inestates across Europe (Power, 1997). Theextreme cases are few but far more resourcesmust be dedicated to containing and helpingthem, not within areas already overloaded withsocial problems, but in a framework of

specialised care as the government’s recentincreased support for mental health underlines(Department of Health, 1998).

The range of anti-social behaviour isfrightening – harassment, arson, drug dealing,youth gangs, burglary, fights and other crime.Once it gets out of control, it is hard to stop as itappears to generate its own momentum. It is onthis front that neighbourhoods are most likely totip over the edge. But a combination of support,supervision and guarding measures gives astrong signal that people cannot abuse theneighbourhood. Essential measures weidentified are:

• proactive policing

• custodial caretaking

• consistent enforcement

• screening of new lettings

• resident involvement in specific problems

• clear tenancy agreements

• co-operation between landlords and amulti-agency approach to problem-solving

• localised social supports

• special care and support for people withspecial needs

• family support.

Young men

Ideas about policing and behaviour breakdownunderline the problems stemming from the lossof role for many men in low income urbancommunities (Power and Tunstall, 1997). Work

101

What can be done?

patterns have changed in such a radical waythat young men with low skills often no longerknow where they fit in. They are heavy losers inthe school system and the new job market(Social Exclusion Unit, 1998). It is a vast newsocial issue that receives too little focus and isbuilding up into a longer-term problem.

Some of the trends are alarming – the loss ofmale jobs, the growth in lone parent female-headed families, the fear of youth gangs and theharassment of witnesses. In a report on the riotsin the 1990s, we explored some of these issues(Power and Tunstall, 1997). A central lessonfrom that study was that communication andlinkage can stop aggression and hostility frommounting to a point of inevitable breakdown.

The government’s emphasis on educationneeds to do more than attack bad teachers andpoorly performing schools; or help ambitiousparents choose better schools; or reduce classsizes in the overcrowded (usually over-subscribed, better performing) schools. Tough,under-performing, inner city schools are oftenwhere special efforts are needed to helpalienated, truanting and excluded boys, thechildren who start to fail on day one because oftheir environmental handicaps and never catchup. Investing more in those with greatestdifficulties is expensive; the returns areuncertain, but the failures create far-reachingsocietal problems. Friendly, well structuredsecondary schools with a strong focus on coresubjects, physical and social outlets, and parentinvolvement will help capture pupils’enthusiasm.

Many young people feel that society doesn’tvalue them, that they are failures and a burden,or worse. This provokes immense hostility inyouth which converts into aggressive attitudes

towards adults and authority. Changing‘attitude’ in youth requires confidence and theeducation of adults to deal with young peoplemore positively. The voiceless/powerless/aggressive syndrome can be reversed (Powerand Tunstall, 1997). This makes residentinvolvement, policing and local managementessential to building bridges with young people.Linking things together so young men can geton the bridge is the most difficult of all, but it isdoable.

Neighbourhood management or strategic

vision?

When an area is pressured by many societalproblems because of its position at the bottom ofthe urban hierarchy, intervention of a differentkind is needed. A new kind of neighbourhood‘supremo’, responsible for ‘booting through’decisions, resources and actions, can be thepivot of integrated regeneration (SocialExclusion Unit, 1998). By definition, theneighbourhood ‘supremo’ needs to have realauthority and a budget to act as a catalyst inchanges (Ballymun Regeneration, 1998; Gregory,1998).

The neighbourhood management idea hasemerged from several experiences.

• It became a model for turning aroundsome of the most difficult estates inBritain in the 1980s.

• The Social Exclusion Unit proposes it as away of ‘joining up’ ground level services.

• European Rescue programmes, targetedat giant peripheral estates of up to 11,000dwellings, successfully adopted this

102


integrated, localised approach with amanager in charge (Power, 1999).

• In Britain, around £10 million ofgovernment revenue is spent each year oneach estate of 1,000 dwellings (OECD,1991). Making this ‘work on the ground’to produce the caretaking, repairs,policing, training that estates need iselusive but crucial.

• Hands-on intensive management, pullingthe patchwork of services, initiatives andideas together, can have a dramaticimpact.

• Successful experiments involve manyservices, but housing management isoften in the lead because of thedominance of council landlords in thepoorest areas.

• It only works across small areas wherepeople identify a local interest.

• While area regeneration programmes arein train, a project manager can often playthese roles. But neighbourhoodmanagement is about long-term, notshort-term, inputs; about redirectingrevenue already in the system, not

‘special programmes’; about linkingneighbourhoods into the wider systemand developing fully a voice for localorganisations and residents.

If key urban services were organised withina framework of neighbourhood management,leading to co-ordination and supervision, someof the most intractable problems would begin toshrink. The approach needs:

• a new framework• experimentation• independence – a project structure• local authority commitment• relatively small pump-priming• strong political backing.

Figure 10 shows how neighbourhoodmanagement can provide local areas withintensive focused action linking them to thewider city. This requires external andgovernment support – the top-down approach –combined with local services, community actionand involvement – the bottom-up approach. Wecall this a patchwork model because the manysmall levers we found at work inneighbourhoods can together be made morepowerful than the sum of the parts.

103

What can be done?

Figure 10 Patchwork model of neighbourhood change

Top-down Local – linked – long-term Bottom-up

Neighbourhood catalyst/‘supremo‘

ImpactResources to ground level Action on the spotHigh visibility Eyes on the problemDirect communication Community bridgesLocal supervision Multiplication of activityLocal decisions Swift enforcement

GovernmentFundingPolicy frameworkPolitical leadershipCo-ordination/oversight/linkage/integration/standards/enforcementEvaluation

LandlordFinancial managementResident consultationUpgradingRepairs/maintenanceLettings/marketingGuarding/securityLiaison with other services

Other local servicesSchoolsHealthPoliceShops and businessesTransportChurchesVoluntary bodies

Community actionCommunity centresClubs and cafesYouth supportFamily supportMinority initiativesTraining programmesSecurity

Estate focusReinvestmentCity links

Neighbourhood budgetLocal team‘New management’

Local basesLocal co-ordinationExternal support

Consultation/communicationRepresentation/organisationAccess – supportInput – control

RequirementsGovernment interventionLocal political leadershipStrong local leadershipLinks to cityDevolution of power

Delivery mechanismsOrganisationAreaMulti-faceted serviceInter-service co-operation

TechniquesMixed usesVaried lettingsActive marketingStrong supervisionResident involvementProblem-solving drive

Source: Power, 1997.

Area organisationMulti-faceted serviceInter-service co-operationHands-on presence

104

14 Conclusion

This report documents an unexpecteddevelopment in English cities. In spite ofvirtually continuous housing shortages fromWorld War II to the mid-1970s, particularly inlow income, urban communities, there is nowclear evidence of housing abandonment withincities. This threatens and undermines theviability of the cities themselves and thesurvival of the neighbourhoods most affected.We studied the problem in detail in the North,but we gathered evidence of low demand forhousing in neighbourhoods nationwide. Theproblem was most extensive in council estates.This development is occurring despite a largepredicted growth in households and the arguedneed to build on greenfields.

The efforts to restore and regenerate innerneighbourhoods help to hold conditions andsupport remaining residents, but they have notyet reversed the outward flow of populationsand jobs. Many historic factors had contributed:

• Britain’s long industrial decline andeconomic restructuring leading to chronicunemployment and skill mismatch in cities

• Britain’s interventionist slum clearanceand mass council building programmesleading to the dominance of large, poorestates in inner cities

• long-term support for low-density,suburban owner occupation fuellingconstant flight of higher earners.

Once a city exodus has gathered momentum,the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods at thebottom suffer disproportionate losses. This isoften coupled with high demand in morepopular areas.

The critical driving factors leading to actualabandonment are:

• the history and reputation of an area thatdeters ambitious newcomers

• the decayed environment

• easy access to better housing in betterneighbourhoods

• the management problems facing localauthorities

• the failure of mainstream services at thebottom

• the gradual breakdown of social stabilityleading to anti-social behaviour, crimeand fear.

There is real potential for repopulating innerareas based on a shift in approach.

• We can build on the positive measuresalready in train.

• We need to reinforce our universalsupports such as education, police andhealth, while targeting precarious areaswith additional help.

• We need to market social housing to awide band of the population to raise itsvalue and increase demand.

• We need private owners to be involved inmaintaining property and conditions.

• Regeneration projects can attract ‘urbanpioneers’ back into centre cities andgradually spread into the increasinglyempty inner neighbourhoods.

• It is central to encourage existingresidents to stay and rebuild conditionsas they provide an anchor for city rebirth.

• City densities need to be high to supportservices and create the street life thatmakes urban neighbourhoods attractive.

105

Conclusion

• We need to fit in many more smallhouseholds to redensify our cities.

• Proactive policing can help to restoreconfidence, contain violence and reducefear.

• Policing requires many channels ofcommunications, local supports, clearground rules and strong communitylinks.

• In the end, urban neighbourhoods needan over-arching structure for managingconditions and orchestrating the constantchanges.

Table 44 illustrates the tension between steepdecline and renewal.

Many different approaches and initiativeswork for neighbourhoods in trouble and manydifferent buttresses are in place to sustain theweb of interactions that keep communities alive.But national, regional, local authority andneighbourhood initiatives must link together ina continuous chain. Universal underpinningworks only to the extent that the poorest peopleand most disadvantaged areas receive special

help. ‘Being relentless’ and ‘Doing it all’ is thepromise of the new government.

It is not inevitable that inner city areas willcontinue to lose people, control and viability. Itis possible to make cities work. It is essential tothe future of our environment, our communitiesand our crowded country that we invest more insaving what is clearly a huge but wasting asset.We must not leave inner city neighbourhoods injeopardy. The ideas which this work stimulatedare shown in Table 45.

Cities work through multiple enterprises,diverse households and communities. Stoppingthe spread of large urban poverty belts, as hashappened in the US, is central to city growth,change and recovery (HUD, 1997; Jargowsky1997). The neighbourhoods where we witnessedsuch acute decline may become the urbancentres of tomorrow. They offer many assets:proximity; infrastructure; environmentalpotential; stable enclaves of residents holdingon for a better future. It should not be beyondthe wit and energy of our still highly urban, cityfocused society to lever in a new and bettercentury for our cities.

Economic and societal shiftsSkewed city populationsSkewed city tenure structure

Strong polarisationRapid decay of inner city neighbourhoodsGrowth in anti-social behaviourCrime, violenceFear and insecurityLoss of cohesion and purposeIncipient abandonment and demolition

Table 44 Current tensions in neighbourhood change

Threat – abandonment Potential – renaissance

Intrinsic, undervalued assetsCommunity and civic leadershipFight-back, defending and developing city

programmesReinvestment and rescueRegeneration programmesBreak-up of large council estates, open accessTransfer to new social landlordsCity centre renewal and reclamationNew urban pioneersPeople-based approaches

106


Table 45 Ideas for government action arising from the study

National Regional District Neighbourhood

Increase densityguidelines

Facilitate brownfieldinvestment

Pass true cost ofgreenfielddevelopment todevelopers

Develop urbantransport

Monitor demolitionsand reduceincentives

Proactively encouragetenure diversification

Open up the allocationof social housing

Identify and ring fencerevenue streams forlocal programmes

Target high demandregions for newhousing

Equalise incentives forrenovation with newbuild

Incentivise honesty inprogrammeproposals andmonitoring

Support incrementalorganic development

Promote new ideas,structures

Push mixed uses,mixed incomes

Target inner andcentre city regrowth

Develop pro-citystance

Propose brownfieldplan

Intensifyenvironmentalagenda

Target worst first inparallel with generalsupport

Target economicdevelopment, jobs

Link services andinitiatives

Focus on majorproblem areas

Develop localenvironmental planincluding brownfieldplan

Set environmentalguidelines

Develop specialsupports for familiesin difficulty

Advertise/marketsocial housing

Push tenure diversityCreate arm’s length

non-profit landlordson continental modelto take on councilhousing

Developneighbourhoodmanagement

Identify local revenuebudgets

Decentralise decisionsand control

Help train residentactivists

Support communitydevelopment

Promote proactivepolicing

Push training,investment

Cut procedures andbureaucracy

Create neighbourhood‘supremo’ to deliverneighbourhoodmanagement

Develop proposals forlocal housingcompanies toencourage investment

Develop local policepresence and liaison

Collaborate withresidents in all localinitiatives

Create small seed-corngrant fund to supportnew ideas andcontinue supportingexisting successfulprojects

Target local budgets onlocal areas withdevolved structuresand decision-making

Develop communityplans, communitycompacts, localenvironment actionplans

Screen lettings to allareas of concentrateddisadvantage

Use local budgets togenerate local jobs

Introduce super-caretaking

Involve schools incommunity

Engage health visitors

Note: Tables 38 and 39 show the initiatives, policies and proposals already in train.

107

Atkinson, R. and Kintrea, K. (1998) Reconnecting

Excluded Communities: The Neighbourhood Impacts

of Owner Occupation. Edinburgh: Scottish Homes

Audit Commission (1989) Urban Regeneration

and Economic Development: The Local Government

Dimension. London: HMSO

Ballymun Regeneration (1998) The Master Plan

for Ballymun. Dublin: Ballymun Regeneration

Best, R. (1998) Presentation to the Urban TaskForce, Manchester, June

Blunkett, D. (1998) ‘Launch of Education ActionZones’, DfEE press release, 23 June

Bramley, G. (1998) ‘Housing abandonment inthe English inner city: housing surpluses andhousing need’, paper presented at conference,University of York, July

Briggs, A. (1983) A Social History of England.Harmondsworth: Penguin Books

Burbidge, M. (1992) Internal report onScandinavian estate based services, DoE

Burbidge, M. et al. (1981) An Investigation of

Difficult to Let Housing. London: DoE

Burchardt, T. and Hills, J. (1998) Financial

Services and Social Exclusion. Insurance Trends:Quarterly Statistics and Research Review.London: Association of British Insurers

Burnett, J. (1978) A Social History of Housing

1815–1970. Newton Abbott: David and Charles

Burns, W. (1963) New Towns for Old: The

Technique of Urban Renewal. London: LeonardHill

References

Burrows, R. (1997) Contemporary Patterns of

Residential Mobility in Relation to Social Housing

in England. York: Centre for Housing Policy

Burrows, R. and Rhodes, D. (1998) Unpopular

Places? Area Disadvantage and the Geography of

Misery in England. Bristol: The Policy Press

Caisse des Depots (1998) Seminar at LSE, 23November

Carley, M. and Kirk, K. (1998) Sustainable by

2020? A Strategic Approach to Urban Regeneration

for Britain’s Cities. Bristol: The Policy Press, withJoseph Rowntree Foundation

CASE (1998) Report to ESRC Conference onSocial Exclusion, 2 December

Catholic Education Service (1997) ‘A struggle forexcellence: Catholic secondary schools in urbanpoverty areas’, report prepared by theCommittee for Community Relations of theBishops’ Conference of England and Wales

Central Statistical Office (1998) Regional Trends.London: HMSO

CHAC (Housing Management Sub-Committeeof the Central Housing Advisory Committee ofthe Ministry of Housing and Local Government)(1939) Management of Municipal Housing Estates:

First Report. London: HMSO

CHAC (1945) Management of Municipal Housing

Estates: Second Report. London: HMSO

CHAC (1949) Selection of Tenants and Transfers

and Exchanges: Third Report. London: HMSO

CHAC (1953a) Living in Flats. London: HMSO

CHAC (1953b) Transfers, Exchange and Rents:

Fourth Report. London: HMSO

108


CHAC (1955a) Residential Qualifications: Fifth

Report. London: HMSO

CHAC (1955b) Unsatisfactory Tenants: Sixth


CHAC (1956) Moving from the Slums: Seventh


CHAC (1959) Councils and their Houses: Eighth


CHAC (1961) Homes for Today and Tomorrow

(Parker Morris Report). London: HMSO

CHAC (1969) Council Housing, Purposes,

Procedures and Priorities: Ninth Report

(Cullingworth Report). London:HMSO

Chartered Institute of Housing (CIoH) (1998)Low Demand for Housing Discussion Paper.Coventry: CIoH

Cole, I. and Shayer, S. (1998) Beyond Housing

Investment: Regeneration, Sustainability and the

Role of Housing Associations. Sheffield: Centre forRegional Economic and Social Research,Sheffield Hallam University

Community Development Project (1976)Whatever Happened to Council Housing? London:Community Development Project Informationand Intelligence Unit

Community Group Report1 (1996) Tenants’survey results, November 1996

Council Report (1998) Report on new housebuilding programme to Regeneration Board, 21September

CPRE (1998) Urban Exodus, a report for CPREprepared by T. Champion et al. London: CPRE

Crook, A.D.H., Darke, R.A. and Disson, J.S.(1996) A New Lease of Life? Housing Association

Investment on Local Authority Housing Estates.Bristol: The Policy Press

Crossman, R. (1975) The Diaries of a Cabinet

Minister, Vol. I. London: Hamish Hamilton andJonathan Cape

Cullingworth, B. (1969) Housing and Labour

Mobility: A Preliminary Report. Paris: OECD

Davies, N. (1997) Dark Heart: The Shocking Truth

about Hidden Britain. London: Chatto andWindus Ltd

Daunton, M.J. (1987) A Property Owning

Democracy? Housing in Britain. London: Faber

DETR (1997a) Monitoring information ondemolitions

DETR (1997b) Housing, Family and Working Lives.Coventry: HMSO

DETR (1998a) 1998 Index of Local Deprivation.London: DETR

DETR (1998b) Planning for the Communities of the

Future. London: HMSO

DETR (1998c) What Works – Learning the Lessons:

Final Evaluation of City Challenge. London: DETR

DETR (1998d) Evaluation of the Single

Regeneration Budget Challenge Fund – A

Partnership for Regeneration: An Interim

Evaluation. London: DETR

DETR (1998e) Consultation Paper A New Financial

Framework for Local Authority Housing: Resource

Accounting in the Housing Revenue Account.London: DETR

109

References

DoE (1974) ‘Difficult to let’, unpublished reportof postal survey

DoE (1977) Inner Area Studies. London: DoE

DoE (1981a) Difficult to Let Investigation. London:DoE

DoE (1981b) Report of visit to Newcastle forPEP

DoE (1996) Urban Trends in England: Latest

Evidence from the 1991 Census. London: HMSO

DoE (1997) Mapping Local Authority Estates Using

the Index of Local Conditions. London: DoE

Department of Health (1998) Press statement onadditional funding for mental health, 10December

Donnison, D. and Middleton, A. (1987)Regenerating the Inner City: Glasgow’s Experience.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul

Downes, D. (ed.) (1989) Crime and the City:

Essays in Memory of John Barron Mays. London:Macmillan

Dunleavy, P. (1981) The Politics of Mass Housing

in Britain 1945–75. Oxford: Clarendon Press

(The) Economist (1998) Economist series on Britishcities, August

Ferris, J. (1972) Participation in Urban Planning –

the Barnsbury Case. Occasional Papers on SocialAdministration (No. 46). London: G. Bell & Sons

Fielder, S. and Smith, R. (1996) Vacant Dwellings

in the Private Sector. London: DoE

Fletcher, A. (1995) Homes Still Wasted. London:Empty Homes Agency

Foot, M. (1973) Aneurin Bevan: A Biography, Vol.

II 1945–1960. London: Davis-Poynter

Forrest, R. and Murie, A. (1988) Selling the

Welfare State: The Privatisation of Public Housing.London: Routledge

Gauldie, E. (1979) Cruel Habitations: A History of

Working-Class Housing, 1780–1918. London:Allen & Unwin

Giddens, A. (1993) The Consequences of Modernity.Cambridge: Policy Press

Gladwell, M. (1996) ‘The tipping point’, New

Yorker, 3 June

Glasgow District Council (Housing) (1986)Inquiry into Housing in Glasgow. Glasgow: CityPress

Glennerster, H. and Hills, J. (1998) The State of

Welfare: The Economics of Social Spending. Oxford:OUP

Greater London Council (GLC) (1979) HousingCommittee minutes, GLC

Gregg, P. (forthcoming) Report of Treasuryseminar on social exclusion

Gregory, S. (1998) Transforming Local Services:

Partnership in Action. York: JRF

(The) Guardian (1999) ‘The joy of tower blocks:electronic eyes turn seedy flats into des res’,6 January

Habitat (1996) An Urbanising World. Oxford:OUP for the United Nations Office on HumanSettlements

Hackney Borough Council (1992) The EstateAction Form B submissions, August

110


Hall, P. (1989) London 2001. London: UnwinHyman

Hall, P. (1990) Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual

History of Urban Planning and Design in the

Twentieth Century. Oxford: Blackwell

Hall, P. and Ward, C. (1998) Sociable Cities: The

Legacy of Ebenezer Howard. New York: J. Wiley

Halsey, A.H. (ed.) (1988) British Social Trends

since 1900 – A Guide to the Changing Social

Structure of Britain. Coventry: HMSO

Hamilton, R. (ed.) (1976) Street by Street.London: North Islington Housing RightsProjects

Hills, J. (1998) Thatcherism, New Labour and the

Welfare State. CASEpaper 13. London: CASE

Hobcraft, J. (1998) Intergenerational and Life-

course Transmission of Social Exclusion: Influences

of Childhood Poverty, Family Disruption and

Contact with the Police. CASEpaper 15. London:CASE

Holland, Sir Milner (Chairman) (1965) Report of

the Committee on Housing in Greater London.Cmnd 2605. London: HMSO

Holmans, A.E. (1987) Housing Policy in Britain.London: Croom Helm

Holmans, A.E. (1995) Housing Demand and Need

in England 1991–2011. York: JRF

Home Office (1993–97) Criminal Statistics

England and Wales. London: HMSO

Hough, M. and Tilley, N. (1998) Getting the

Grease to the Squeak: Research Lessons for Crime

Prevention. London: Home Office, Police PolicyDirectorate

House of Commons (1998) A Brown and Pleasant

Land: Household Growth and Brownfield Sites.Report 117. London: Parliamentary Office ofScience and Technology

Housing Corporation (1997) Registered Social

Landlords in 1996: General Report. London: HC

Housing Services Advisory Group (HSAG)(1978) Organising a Comprehensive Housing

Service. London: DoE

HUD (1997) The State of Cities. Washington:HUD

Hughes, J.W. and Sternlieb, G. (1987) The

dynamics of American Housing. New Brunswicks,NJ: Rutgers

Hunt, R. and Kullberg, J. (1998) ‘Dutch courage:advertising social housing in Britain’, Housing

Agenda, May

Huttman, E. and van Vliet, W. (1988) Handbook

of Housing and the Built Environment. New York:Greenwood Press

Islington Borough Council (1976) Estate Action

Programmes on Unpopular Estates. London:Islington Council

Jacobs, J. (1970) The Death and Life of Great

American Cities. London: Cape

Jargowsky, P. (1997) Poverty and Place: Ghettos,

Barrios, and the American city. New York: RussellSage Foundation

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (1995) JRF InquiryGroup on Income and Wealth

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (1998a)Foundations – Regenerating Neighbourhoods:

Creating Integrated and Sustainable Improvements.York: JRF

111

References

Joseph Rowntree Foundation (1998b) Findings –

Patterns of Neighbourhood Dissatisfaction. York:JRF

Keenan, P. (1998) ‘Housing abandonment anddemand’, paper presented at conference atUniversity of York, July

Kiernan, K. (1997) The Legacy of Parental Divorce:

Social, Economic and Demographic Experiences in

Adulthood. CASEpaper 1. London: CASE

Konttinen, S. (1983) Byker. London: JonathanCape

Maclennan, D. (1991) Paper on A Strategic

Approach to Cities. Edinburgh: OECD

Maclennnan, D. (1997) ‘Britain’s cities: a morepositive future’, Lunar Society lecture,November

Malpass, P. and Means, R. (eds) (1993)Implementing Housing Policy. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press

Malpass, P. and Murie, A. (1994) Housing Policy

and Practice. Basingstoke: Macmillan

Manchester and Newcastle (1998) Interviewswith chief executives and directors of housing,September–October

Manchester City Council (1993) Manchester1991 Census Ward Profiles

Manchester City Council (1996) ‘Rehousingdemand: report to Housing and EnvironmentalServices Committee’, 30 May

Manchester City Council (1997a) Manchester

Matters: Economic, Unemployment and Welfare

Benefits Bulletin, Summer

Manchester City Council (1997b)Neighbourhood renewal assessment1

Manchester City Council (1998a) Manchester’s1996 Local Census

Manchester City Council (1998b) New housebuilding programme, report to RegenerationBoard1, September

Manchester City Council (1998c) Council reporton neighbourhood options1, October

Manchester City Council (1998d) Report onurban village in Ancoates Manchester

Manchester City Council (1998e) Observationsto Joseph Rowntree advisory committee, 1December

Manchester City Council (1998f) Evidence fromLow Demand Team, December

Marris, R. (1996) How to Save the Underclass.Basingstoke: Macmillan

Modood, T., Berthoud, R., Lakey, J., Nazroo, J.,Smith, P., Virdee, S. and Beishon, S. (1998) Ethnic

Minorities in Britain: Diversity and Disadvantage.London: Policy Studies Institute

National House-Building Council Conference(1998) ‘Sustainable housing – meeting thechallenge’, 11 September

NCHA (1998) Thinking the Unthinkable:

Delivering Sustainability in the North. Chester leStreet: NCHA

Newcastle and Manchester (1998) Statistics onRight to Buy sales supplied by City Councils

Newcastle City Council (1993) Newcastle CityProfiles: results from the 1991 Census

112


Newcastle City Council (1994) Biennialresidents’ survey

Newcastle City Council (1997) Newcastle CityProfiles: results from the 1996 Inter CensalSurvey

Newcastle City Council (1998a) Internalproposals on combating social exclusion

Newcastle City Council (1998b) Tour withsenior council officer, 12 November

Newcastle City Council (1998c) UnitaryDevelopment Plan

Newcastle City Council (1998d) ‘A practicalexperience of building on the green belt’, paperpresented to the National Housing and TownPlanning Conference, Carlisle, 14–16 July

Newcastle City Council (1998e) Report toHousing and Development Committees onindustrial development opportunities

Newcastle City Council (1998f) Annual Reviewof Housing Development and Land Availability,report to Housing Committee, November

Northumbria Police (1998) Statistics supplied onlocal crime rates

OECD (1991) Seminar on liveable cities,Edinburgh, October

ONS (1990 and 1991) Labour Force Survey/Great

Britain. London: ONS

ONS, DoE/Green, H. (1996) Housing in England

1994/95. A report of the 1994/95 Survey ofEnglish Housing carried out by the SocialSurvey Division of ONS on behalf of the DoE/Hazel Green. London: HMSO

ONS (1997) Social Trends. London: HMSO

ONS (1998) Mid Census population projectionsreported in The Guardian, 8 December

OPCS (1984) 1981 Census (Ward and Civil Parish

Monitors). London: OPCS

OPCS (1992) Census 1991: Definitions: Great

Britain. London: HMSO

OPCS (1994) 1991 Census (Ward and Civil Parish

Monitors). London: OPCS

Pacione, M. (ed.) (1997) Britain’s Cities:

Geographies of Division in Urban Britain. London:Routledge

Pawson, H., Kearns, A., Keoghan, M., Malcolm,J. and Morgan, J. (1997) Managing Voids and

Difficult to Let Property. London: The HousingCorporation

Peabody Trust (1996–98) Annual Reports

PEP (1981) Improving Problem Council Estates: A

Summary of Aims and Progress. London: DoE

Plank, D. (ed.) (1998) Joined up Thinking: A

Directory of Good Practice for Local Authority

Empty Property Strategies. London: EmptyHomes Agency

Poones, J., Schafer, R. and Hartman, C.W. (1980)Housing Urban America. New York: Aldine

Power, A. (1981) Report on the Tulse Hill Estate for

the Greater London Council. London: PEP

Power, A. (1982) Priority Estates Project 1982:

Improving Problem Council Estates: A Summary of

Aims and Progress. London: DoE

Power, A. (1984) Local Housing Management.London: DoE

113

References

Power, A. (1987) Property before People – The

Management of Twentieth-century Council Housing.London: Allen & Unwin

Power, A. with PEP Associates (1991a) Housing

Management: A Guide to Quality and Creativity.London: Longman

Power, A. (1991b) Running to Stand Still: Progress

in Local Management on 20 Unpopular Housing

Estates 1982–1988. London: PEP Ltd

Power, A. (1993) Hovels to High Rise. London:Routledge

Power, A. (1995) Perspectives on Europe. London:Housing Corporation

Power, A. (1997) Estates on the Edge. London:Macmillan Press

Power, A. and Mumford, K. for the HousingCorporation (1999) Report of low demandseminar at the National Tenants’ ResourceCentre, convened by the Housing Corporation,September 1998

Power, A. and Tunstall, R. (1995) Swimming

against the Tide. York: JRF

Power, A. and Tunstall, R. (1997) Dangerous

Disorder: Riots and Violent Disturbances in 13

Areas of Britain, 1991–92. York: JRF

Prescott, J. (1998) Press release on launch ofUrban Task Force. London: DETR

Prescott-Clarke, P., Clemens, S. and Park, A. forthe DoE (1994) Roots into Local Authority

Housing: A Study of Local Authority Waiting Lists

and New Tenancies. London: HMSO

Prime Minister (1998) The Government’s Annual

Report 1997/98. London: The Stationery Office

Raynsford, N. (1999) Written communication toLSE Housing concerning urban sprawl,15 February

Reich, R. (1993) The Work of Nations: Preparing

Ourselves for Twenty-first Century Capitalism.New York: Vintage

Richardson, E. (1997) ‘In the loop’, report to theTrustees of the Gatsby Project. London: LSEHousing

Ridley, P. (1996) LSE housing seminar,November

Robson, B. (1995) Inner Cities Research Project:

Assessing the Impact of Urban Policy. London:HMSO

Rogers, R. (1997) Cities for a Small Planet.London: Faber

Rudlin, D. (1998) Tomorrow: A Peaceful Path for

Urban Reform. The Feasibility of Accommodating

75% of New Homes in Urban Areas. Manchester:UrbED

Sassen, S. (1998) Globalisation and its Discontents.New York: New Press

Saunders, P. (1990) A Nation of Home Owners.London: Unwin Hyman

Schussheim, M.J. (1974) The Modest Commitment

to Cities. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books

Shelter (1998) Proposal to National Lottery on‘Homeless to Home’ initiative

Social Exclusion Unit (1998) Bringing Britain

Together: A National Strategy for Neighbourhood

Renewal. London: The Stationery Office

Southwark Council (1994) Peckham Partnership:

A Bid for Single Regeneration Budget Funding,prepared by the Partnership

114


Stegman, M.A. (1970) Housing and Economics:

The American Dilemma. Cambridge, MA: MITPress

Stegman, M.A. (1972) Housing Investment in the

Inner City: The Dynamics of Decline. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press

Sternlieb, G. and Burchell, R. W. (1973)Residential Abandonment: The Tenement Landlord

Revisited. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers

Thompson, F.H.L. (1990) Cambridge Social

History of Britain 1750–1950, Vols 1, 2, 3.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Travers, A. (1998) ‘Housing: high hopes’ The

Guardian, 17 June

Turok, I. and Edge, N. (forthcoming) The Jobs

Gap in British Cities. York: JRF

Urban Splash (1998) Live, Work, Play. Liverpool:Urban Splash

Urban Task Force (1999a) Internal report of visitto Barcelona by the Urban Task Force

Urban Task Force (1999b) Urban Renaissance –

Sharing the Vision: Summary of Responses to the

Urban Task Force Prospectus. London: Urban TaskForce

Vergara, C.J. (1997) The New American Ghetto.New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press

Wadhams, C. (1998) Reinvestment Plus – Creating

Thriving Neighbourhoods. Birmingham: ChrisWadhams Associates

Webster, D. (1998) ‘Employment change,migration and housing abandonment’, paperpresented to conference at Centre for Urban andRegional Studies, University of Birmingham,November

WHHA (1998) Living in Town Report: Promoting

the Housing Potential of London’s High Streets.

London: West Hampstead Housing AssociationLtd

Whitehead, C., Kleinman, M. and Chattrabhutti,A. (1995) The Private Rental Housing Market: A

Review of Current Trends and Future Prospects.London: Council of Mortgage Lenders

Whitehead, C. (1998) Personal communicationfrom Christine Whitehead, on the issue ofprivate sector vacancies

Wilmott, P. and Young, M. (1957) Family and

Kinship in East London. London: Routledge andKegan Paul

Wilson, W.J. (1996) Are Ghettos Emerging in

Europe? London: LSE Housing

Wilson, W.J. (1997) When Work Disappears. NewYork: Alfred A. Knopf

Wohl, A.S. (1977) The Eternal Slum: Housing and

Social Policy in Victorian London. London:Edward Arnold

Wood, M. and Bryan, J. for the NorthernHousing Research Partnership (1997) Housing in

the North: A Study of Empty Homes. Chester-le-Street: Northern Consortium of HousingAuthorities

Young, M. and Lemos, G. (1997) Communities we

Have Lost and Can Regain. London: Lemos andCrane

Note

1 Names of specific local areas have beenomitted to protect their identity.

115

Appendix 1Interviews with local authorities and housing associations

around the country

6,42

8 ne

wap

plic

ants

(199

7/98

)

Dis

appe

aran

ceof

pre

ssur

e fr

omho

mel

ess

hous

ehol

ds.

Mor

e tr

ansi

ent

hous

ehol

ds

appl

ying

.

Yes

– un

popu

lar

esta

tes.

30%

lets

toho

mel

ess

– on

lysl

ight

ly h

ighe

rth

an L

A. H

As

have

str

eet

prop

erti

es –

not

sam

e is

sues

as

big

esta

tes.

13,5

00

1.1%

(142

)

4,29

0 (o

f whi

ch1,

520

tran

sfer

s)

Shel

tere

d s

tock

impo

ssib

le to

let.

Hom

eles

sap

plic

atio

nsin

crea

sed

(but

fam

ilies

red

uced

, sin

gle

vuln

erab

lein

crea

sed

).

Yes

– 1-

bed

s an

dbe

dsi

ts–

stig

mat

ised

esta

tes

(of w

hich

ther

e ar

e th

ree

mai

n on

es).

Yes

– in

thei

rsh

elte

red

sto

ckan

d in

thei

rbe

dsi

ts. H

ealt

hyd

eman

d fo

rne

w-b

uild

.

34,0

00

2.01

%

~ 1

0%

16,1

00 o

nco

mm

onho

usin

g re

gist

er

Red

ucin

gd

eman

d fo

rsh

elte

red

.Fa

lling

dem

and

in a

min

orit

y of

gene

ral n

eed

sst

ock.

Yes,

in s

helt

ered

stoc

k; c

erta

inar

eas;

cer

tain

prop

erty

type

s(w

alk-

up fl

ats)

.

Yes

– w

ith

shel

tere

d s

tock

(the

LA

can

’tm

ake

nom

inat

ions

),an

d in

cer

tain

area

s.

97,0

00

2.23

%

14%

(199

7/98

)

36–4

0,00

0 (o

fw

hich

26,

000

=tr

ansf

ers)

1997

Incr

easi

ngtu

rnov

er in

LA

stoc

k.Fa

lling

wai

ting

list.

Yes

– in

are

asw

ith

poor

repu

tati

on a

ndin

unp

opul

arst

ock

type

s/po

or c

ond

itio

nst

ock.

Yes

– se

e H

Aco

lum

ns.

11,0

00

20.7

% (1

997/

98)

Dra

mat

icin

crea

se in

turn

over

(fro

m12

% in

199

6/97

to 2

1% in

199

7/98

) and

aban

don

men

ts(5

0% in

199

7/98

).

Yes

– hi

ghtu

rnov

er m

ainl

yin

flat

s. A

lso

stig

mat

ised

area

s.

N/A

4,30

0

18%

(199

7/98

)

Wai

ting

lists

incl

usiv

es, m

any

area

s ha

ve n

ow

aitin

g lis

t at a

ll.

Dra

mat

icin

crea

se in

turn

over

(fro

m12

% in

199

6/97

to 1

8% in

199

7/98

).

Yes

– in

stig

mat

ised

area

s an

d e

stat

es(i

nc. n

ew-b

uild

),an

d s

peci

fic

prop

erty

type

s:1-

bed

s, b

edsi

ts,

shel

tere

d, p

oor

terr

aces

.

N/A

9,00

0

15%

2,00

0

Lar

ge s

cale

volu

ntar

ytr

ansf

er (L

SVT

)H

A (1

990)

. LA

used

rec

eipt

tobu

ild m

ore

hous

es –

red

uced

dem

and

for

the

flat

s.

1,00

0 lo

wd

eman

dpr

oper

ties

due

to: t

ype,

loca

tion

,re

puta

tion

.25

% tu

rnov

er in

this

sto

ck.

N/A

4,22

6

New

hou

ses

inon

e to

wn

in z

ero

dem

and

.Tr

ansi

ent

popu

lati

on o

non

e es

tate

(LSV

T 1

994)

.

Yes

– d

epen

ds

on lo

cati

on.

Als

o, th

ere

is a

surp

lus

of s

ingl

epe

rson

s’ac

com

mod

atio

n.

N/A

Tota

l sto

ck

Voi

ds

Ann

ual

turn

over

Num

ber

onw

aiti

ng li

st

Cha

nges

ind

eman

dex

peri

ence

d

Con

cent

rati

on o

flo

w d

eman

d?

Hou

sing

asso

ciat

ions

affe

cted

?

Inn

er L

ond

onL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Wes

tH

A in

Wes

tH

A in

HA

inH

A in

LA

Eas

tW

est

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Eas

tern

Wes

tern

regi

onre

gion

regi

on

116


No

– ve

ry h

igh

pric

es. £

150,

000

– £2

00,0

00 fo

r a

hous

e.

No.

Ad

vert

isin

g.N

othi

ng is

unsa

leab

le/

unle

ttab

le in

Lon

don

.

No

– qu

ite

high

dem

and

eve

nfo

r po

or q

ualit

ypr

ivat

eac

com

mod

atio

n.

No.

Con

vers

ion

ofsh

elte

red

bed

sits

to fa

mily

-siz

eac

com

mod

atio

n–

succ

essf

ul.

Ad

vert

isin

g of

unpo

pula

res

tate

–su

cces

sful

.M

arke

ting

of

shel

tere

d b

edsi

ts–

unsu

cces

sful

.

Slac

k d

urin

g th

ere

cess

ion.

Som

epe

ople

who

exer

cise

d th

eR

TB

hav

ing

dif

ficu

lty

selli

ng.

No

– no

are

asw

ith

void

s ov

er10

%.

Dem

olit

ion

ofm

ulti

s,re

plac

emen

t by

HA

s. R

edes

ign,

secu

rity

impr

ovem

ents

–su

cces

s. L

etti

ngto

ver

y lo

wpr

iori

ty, u

nder

-oc

cupy

ing.

Res

tric

ted

num

ber

of o

ffer

sto

3 –

red

uced

aver

age

num

ber

of o

ffer

s be

fore

acce

ptan

ce.

Yes

– in

cer

tain

pock

ets

wit

hba

d r

eput

atio

n.

No.

Loc

al a

lloca

tion

polic

ies

inse

lect

ed a

reas

–ha

ve r

educ

edvo

id tu

rn-

arou

nd p

erio

d.

No

– ca

n le

tvi

rtua

llyev

eryt

hing

at

pres

ent.

Hom

eim

prov

emen

ts.

Stoc

k sw

aps

tora

tion

alis

e st

ock.

‘Dec

onve

rsio

ns’.

Cus

tom

ersu

rvey

s. P

lan

tod

emol

ish

som

epr

oper

ties

and

rebu

ild. L

ocal

adve

rts

– no

tgo

od r

espo

nse.

The

re a

re a

reas

wit

h ve

ry h

igh

inci

den

ce o

fvo

ids

rela

ting

topr

oper

ty ty

pe/

stig

mat

ised

esta

tes

or s

tree

ts.

Peop

le ju

st w

ant

to g

et o

ut –

‘sho

uld

be

dem

olis

hed

’.

Tow

er b

lock

refu

rbis

hed,

mar

kete

d, le

tting

squ

otas

to a

chie

vepl

anne

dpo

pula

tion

prof

ileof

wor

king

, non

-w

orki

ng, d

iffer

ent

age

grou

ps, e

tc.

Succ

essf

ul.

Dev

elop

ed th

isfu

rthe

r – ra

nge

ofm

arke

ting

pack

ages

for

part

icul

ar v

oid

type

s, re

gula

r ads

,es

tate

age

nt ty

pebo

ards

, lea

flet

drop

s (lo

calit

yan

d fa

mily

and

frie

nds)

.

No

– th

ere

has

been

a p

riva

tese

ctor

boo

m.

No.

Taki

ng s

trat

egic

look

at t

he s

tock

– qu

esti

onin

gw

heth

erd

emol

itio

n m

ore

sens

ible

than

refu

rbis

hmen

t.A

bout

to k

nock

dow

n on

e bl

ock

of fl

ats.

Con

sid

erin

gou

trig

ht s

ales

of

som

e st

ock.

No.

Priv

ate

hous

ing

affe

cted

?

Any

are

as b

eing

‘aba

ndon

ed’?

Init

iati

ves

und

erta

ken

toco

mba

t low

dem

and

? E

ffec

t?

Inn

er L

ond

onL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Wes

tH

A in

Wes

tH

A in

HA

inH

A in

LA

Eas

tW

est

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Eas

tern

Wes

tern

regi

onre

gion

regi

on

117

Appendix 1

Yes.

The

cou

ncil

owns

too

man

ypr

oper

ties

.

Cou

ld o

pen

upw

aiti

ng li

st to

thos

e no

tpr

evio

usly

cons

ider

ed. I

nL

ond

on, t

here

isve

ry h

igh

dem

and

ove

rall.

Yes

– es

peci

ally

stre

et p

rope

rtie

s.

The

cou

ncil

has

an o

ver-

supp

lyof

one

-bed

s an

dbe

dsi

ts.

Mar

keti

ng o

ffl

ats

to p

eopl

eno

t in

hous

ing

need

.

Yes

– m

any

area

s ve

ryso

ught

aft

er.

Fund

ing

for

furt

her

impr

ovem

ents

.

Loo

king

at

stra

tegy

for

shel

tere

d –

dif

fere

nt u

ses.

Hop

ing

toco

nver

t fla

ts to

fam

ilyac

com

mod

atio

n.A

lso

toco

nsol

idat

est

ock

whe

re L

Aan

d s

ever

alR

SLs

in a

n ar

ea.

Yes

– in

clud

ing

in s

ome

dep

rive

d a

reas

.

Com

bina

tion

of

high

turn

over

,hi

gh n

umbe

r of

unpo

pula

rd

esig

n an

dur

ban

exod

us.

Cha

nge

curr

ent

rest

rict

ive

acce

ss.

Rep

acka

ge to

attr

act g

row

ing

Asi

anpo

pula

tion

who

curr

entl

y ha

vene

gati

vepe

rcep

tion

.

Yes

– bu

t vas

tm

ajor

ity

of s

tock

in d

iffi

cult

inne

rci

ty.

Res

earc

hsu

gges

tspr

oper

tyco

ndit

ion

not

reas

on fo

rle

avin

g –

shou

ldre

dir

ect m

oney

to s

ecur

ity

mea

sure

s.

Still

to tr

yfu

rnis

hed

acco

mm

odat

ion.

Beg

inni

ng to

shar

e in

fo w

ith

othe

r R

SLs.

Yes

– ce

rtai

nar

eas

and

3-b

edho

uses

.

Pace

of c

hang

e.C

onti

nued

red

ucti

on in

dem

and

and

incr

ease

in n

ewvo

ids

each

wee

k.H

uge

deb

tpo

rtfo

lio to

be

fina

nced

.

Mar

keti

ng,

rela

xing

poi

nts

thre

shol

d,

dev

elop

ing

sche

me-

spec

ific

lett

ings

stra

tegi

es,

adap

ting

wor

king

prac

tice

s to

chan

ging

situ

atio

n –

ther

eis

unt

appe

dho

usin

gd

eman

d.

Yes

– ra

tion

ing

mod

el s

till

appl

ies

tom

ajor

ity

ofst

ock.

Lac

k of

adeq

uate

fund

ing

tod

emol

ish

unpo

pula

r hi

gh-

rise

and

bed

sits

.

Still

to tr

y lo

cal

lett

ings

and

allo

win

g un

der

-oc

cupa

tion

.

Yes

– po

cket

s of

high

dem

and

ince

rtai

n lo

cati

ons.

Impa

ct o

f ant

i-so

cial

beh

avio

ur,

resi

den

ts s

care

dto

get

invo

lved

on o

ne e

stat

e.

Mar

keti

ngst

rate

gy n

ot y

etst

arte

d.

Are

as/

stoc

kty

pes

in h

igh

dem

and

?

Futu

re c

once

rns

Futu

re p

oten

tial

Inn

er L

ond

onL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Sou

thL

A in

Wes

tH

A in

Wes

tH

A in

HA

inH

A in

LA

Eas

tW

est

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Mid

lan

ds

Eas

tern

Wes

tern

regi

onre

gion

regi

on

118

West West HA – South South NorthernMidlands Midlands Midlands East LA West LA HALA HA region

Area factorsStigma/reputation ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

Crime rate/lack of feeling of ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

securityConcentration of people living in ✔ x ✔ ✔ – ✔

poverty/lack of employmentopportunities

Property factorsType of housing ✔ ✔ ✔ √ ✔ √Poor physical property condition ✔ x x x ✔ √Visible signs of vacancy, – ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ –i.e. steel security

Service delivery factorsPoor housing management by – x x – x –social landlordsRestrictive allocations policies ✔ – ✔ ✔ – ✔

Reputation of schools x ✔ √ ✔ x –Lack of co-ordination between – – x x x –different service providersLack of shops ✔ x √ ✔ ✔ –

City management factorsContinued new-building by the ✔ – ✔ ✔ (of – ✔

LA/HAs sheltered)Inappropriately targeted – – – ✔ – –regeneration programmesBuilding by the universities – ✔ – x x –reducing student renter population

National trendsUrban exodus ✔ ✔ ✔ – x ✔

Changing tenure aspirations/availability of low cost owner ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔

occupationShift in the industrial base, – – ✔ – – ✔

with loss of jobs from the North

✔ = definite contributor√ = contributes to some extentx = does not contribute– = not discussed

Appendix 2Additional interviews – contributors to low demand

119

Wakefield LiverpoolSheffield SandwellBirkenhead CoventryBlackburn BirminghamBradford WolverhamptonStockton NottinghamMiddlesbrough BedfordSunderland BristolGateshead LambethCleveland and Redcar SouthwarkHull HackneySalford Islington*Wigan Hammersmith and Fulham*Knowsley BrentBurnley HaringeyKirklees GreenwichCarlisle LewishamBolton ThurrockLeeds Brighton

* Generally high demand areas, but with specific unpopular estates.

Appendix 3Areas of the country with evidence of pockets of low demand,

difficult to let properties and high turnover – affecting local

authorities and/or housing associations (not exhaustive)

120

Bramley, G., ‘Housing surpluses and housingneed’, paper presented to conference atUniversity of York, July 1998

CIoH, ‘Low demand for housing – discussionpaper’, paper presented to conference atUniversity of York, July 1998

DETR/Bramley, G., ‘Low demand for housingand unpopular neighbourhoods’, researchcommenced October 1998

Keenan, P., ‘Housing abandonment anddemand’, paper presented to conference atUniversity of York, July 1998

Lowe, S., ‘Housing abandonment in the EnglishInner City’, paper presented to conference atUniversity of York, July 1998

Murie, A., Nevin, B. and Leather, P., ‘Changingdemand and unpopular housing’, WorkingPaper No. 4, Housing Corporation, 1998

Pawson, H., ‘Residential instability and tenancyturnover’, paper presented to conference atUniversity of York, July 1998

Research and Change! Consultancy, ‘Frequentmovers’ study (Joseph Rowntree Foundation,forthcoming)

Stringer, F. (Manchester Housing), ‘Area basedhousing management and corporate responsesto low housing demand’, paper presented toconference at University of York, July 1998

Webster, D., ‘Employment change, migrationand housing abandonment’, paper presented toconference at University of Birmingham,November 1998

Appendix 4Other current research

121

No. of people

Two cities and four neighbourhoodsCentral senior staff 6Staff in the following services:

Housing (LA) 22Housing (HA) 21Education 9Police 12Social Services 3Community/leisure 3Regeneration/private sector renewal 11

Councillors 4Voluntary sector 5Private sector (shops and estate agents) 3Academics 5Residents 24Total 128

Outside the two citiesLA staff 15HA staff 13Voluntary sector 5Total 33

Appendix 5Schedule of fieldwork interviews

122

Appendix 6Manchester City Council: corporate aims and objectives

123

Appendix 6

124

Appendix 7Newcastle’s corporate strategic plan: key extracts

The City Council’s vision for Newcastle

• An accessible city with equal opportunityfor all its people to realise their potentialthrough education, work, and otheractivities without discrimination or fear.

• A city which provides a safe, clean,healthy and sustainable environment.

• A city where residents take an active partin the democratic process and participatein decisions about their public services,their local community and their quality oflife.

• A city which values its rich culture,heritage and strong sense of identity.

• A city which is regional capital of theNorth East and which continues to buildlinks with Europe.

Core values and beliefs

The City Council is committed to:

• The value of public service provided bydemocratically accountable localgovernment.

• The best use of its resources for thebenefit of all residents whilst recognisingthe particular needs of the poorest, mostvulnerable and disadvantaged.

• The vital importance of social, economic,and cultural regeneration to improve thequality of life and opportunity for thepeople of Newcastle.

• The value of working in partnership withcommunity, business, and voluntaryorganisations, with governmentdepartments and with other agencies toachieve the best for our community.

• Equality of opportunity for people fromall of Newcastle’s diverse communities,ensuring that we treat all people withsensitivity, fairness and respect.

• Providing services that are easilyaccessible, responsive, relevant and goodvalue for money, and opportunities forpeople to participate in the developmentof better services.

• Creating an accessible and suitableenvironment offering mobility to all.

• Providing clear information about thestandards that Council services shouldmeet.

• Recognising people’s right to complainand have things put right.

The Council’s priorities

Corporate policy priorities

Priority 1: Educational achievement

Raising levels of attainment and improvingeducational standards for all learners in the City.

Priority 2: Tackling youth and long-term

unemployment

Implementing Welfare to Work and reducingunemployment amongst young people andlong-term unemployment overall.

125

Appendix 7

Priority 3: Community regeneration

Social, economic and cultural regeneration oflocal areas which are suffering or likely to sufferdecline.

Priority 4: Improving the local environment

Working to create a clean, healthy and attractiveenvironment which will improve the quality oflife in Newcastle.

Priority 5: The City as regional and cultural

capital of the North East

Retaining and developing Newcastle’s role asregional capital in terms of retailing,entertainment, cultural facilities andemployment opportunities.

Cross-functional guiding principles

1 Best value

The commitment to quality andcontinuous improvement in everythingwe do.

2 Equal opportunities and accessibility

The commitment to provide servicesfairly to all people in the community,improve access to those services, andensure that we act as an equalopportunities employer.

3 Local Agenda 21

The commitment to minimise the use ofnon-renewable resources and promoterecycling of waste whilst workingtowards building sustainablecommunities.

4 Community participation and involvement

The commitment to promote andfacilitate the active participation ofNewcastle residents in decision makingand the development of communityplanning.

126

Dat

eS

ourc

eA

rtic

le

Oct

. 95

Dai

ly T

eleg

raph

Esc

apin

g fr

om c

itie

s06

/07

/96

The

Eco

nom

ist

The

cit

ies

com

e ba

ck to

life

22/

11/

96M

anch

este

r E

veni

ng N

ews

Unp

opul

ar c

ounc

il ho

mes

suf

feri

ng fr

om d

ecay

are

to b

e d

emol

ishe

d a

nd r

epla

ced

04/

12/

96T

he G

uard

ian

Prov

idin

g an

ext

ra 4

.4 m

illio

n ho

useh

old

s by

201

6 is

a p

ipe

dre

am (P

eter

Hal

l)11

/12

/96

The

Ind

epen

den

tT

he b

uck

stop

s he

re19

96B

irm

ingh

am C

ity

Cou

ncil

Mov

emen

t of p

eopl

e ou

t of t

he c

ity

Jan.

/Fe

b. 9

7R

oof

Mor

e th

an 5

00 H

A s

chem

es a

re d

iffic

ult t

o le

t22

/01

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayH

ousi

ng d

eman

d le

vel i

s an

ove

rest

imat

e22

/01

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayC

oult

er d

ism

isse

s gr

een

belt

sca

rem

onge

rs22

/01

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

aySe

lect

ing

the

righ

t sol

utio

ns o

n ne

ed22

/01

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayJu

st b

ecau

se it

’s th

ere

– th

e la

ck o

f fin

anci

al s

trat

egy

in h

ousi

ng22

/01

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayA

cha

nce

to g

et a

pie

ce o

f the

act

ion

– SR

B fu

ndin

g23

/01

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Ass

ocia

tion

buy

s in

ext

ra p

atro

l fro

m M

anch

este

r po

lice

23/

01/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngE

mpt

ies

lobb

y ha

ils V

AT

har

mon

yM

ar. 9

7H

ousi

ngE

mpt

y ho

uses

(Joh

n Tu

rney

)Ju

n. 9

7T

he H

ousi

ng M

agaz

ine

Put t

he p

eopl

e fi

rst

Jun.

97

The

Hou

sing

Mag

azin

eW

ho w

ants

soc

ial h

ousi

ng?

02/

06/

97To

wns

cape

and

urb

an d

esig

nQ

ualit

y of

life

in c

itie

s13

/06

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Con

quer

ing

the

Vik

ing

– st

oppi

ng a

band

onm

ent o

n an

est

ate

in S

heff

ield

Jul.

97H

ousi

ngK

ey in

gred

ient

is e

nsur

ing

acce

ss to

wor

k on

a s

usta

inab

le b

asis

Jul.

97H

ousi

ngC

losi

ng th

e ga

p be

twee

n ri

ch a

nd p

oor

11/

07/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngL

ow d

eman

d w

ill s

ee 4

00 h

omes

dem

olis

hed

(New

cast

le)

25/

07/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngL

ack

of in

vest

men

t spa

rks

Car

dif

f ram

page

01/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngTe

ens

face

sup

ervi

sion

01/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngW

elco

min

g th

e ne

w fo

cus

on c

omm

unit

ies

08/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

all t

o se

t tar

gets

on

empt

ies

15/

08/

97T

he P

ink

Pape

rSa

lfor

d –

clu

ster

of t

ower

blo

cks

let t

o ga

y an

d le

sbia

n pe

ople

15/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngTo

wer

blo

cks

in N

ewca

stle

ver

y po

pula

r w

ith

vuln

erab

le p

eopl

e15

/08

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Who

le e

stat

es c

ould

spi

ral d

ownw

ard

s be

caus

e of

dru

g d

ealin

g pr

esen

ce21

/08

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayC

ounc

ils k

een

to h

ang

on to

nom

inat

ion

func

tion

22/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

PRE

– lo

cal a

utho

riti

es m

ake

over

-pro

visi

on o

n gr

eenf

ield

sit

es22

/08

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Man

y be

nefi

ts o

f sho

rt-t

erm

soc

ial h

ousi

ng h

ave

been

ove

rloo

ked

22/

08/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngA

ren

t fre

e m

onth

on

one

of C

oven

try

MD

C’s

mos

t run

dow

n es

tate

sSe

p. 9

7H

ousi

ngL

ond

on h

ousi

ng n

eed

Sep.

97

Roo

fW

ould

Bri

tain

gai

n fr

om F

renc

h st

yle

targ

etin

g of

res

ourc

es?

(Jim

Dic

kson

)Se

p. 9

7H

ousi

ngM

ixed

tenu

re e

stat

es o

nly

have

an

effe

ct w

hen

% o

f sha

red

ow

ners

hip

is h

igh

12/

09/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

alls

for

the

build

ing

of n

ew to

wns

sim

ilar

in s

cale

to th

at o

f the

pos

t war

per

iod

12/

09/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngPr

omot

ing

tena

nt tr

aini

ng r

egim

e, e

xplo

ring

nei

ghbo

ur p

robl

ems

12/

09/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngT

he la

st r

esor

t – s

ome

peop

le p

refe

r to

rem

ain

in B

&B

than

live

in h

ard

to le

t12

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Ult

imat

um is

sued

on

empt

y pr

oper

ties

– N

orw

ich

DC

and

Nor

folk

CC

17/

09/

97T

he T

imes

Hal

f of a

ll L

A a

nd H

A r

ente

d p

rope

rtie

s ar

e no

w w

orkl

ess

18/

09/

97H

ull M

ail

Bid

to m

ove

tena

nts

into

no-

go a

reas

(Ang

us Y

oung

)18

/09

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayL

ocal

hou

sing

str

ateg

ies

– H

As

and

LA

s no

t wor

king

wel

l tog

ethe

r

Appendix 8Articles about low demand and abandonment

127

Appendix 8D

ate

Sou

rce

Art

icle

18/

09/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Ben

tile

e es

tate

, pla

ns to

bre

ak u

p es

tate

into

5 v

illag

es a

nd g

et p

eopl

e ba

ck to

wor

k18

/09

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

aySu

rvey

of 2

5 L

As

and

9 H

As

on s

ocia

l exc

lusi

on18

/09

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayD

omes

tic

viol

ence

and

fam

ily d

ispu

tes

are

cont

ribu

ting

to in

crea

se in

old

er h

omel

ess

18/

09/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Cho

osin

g th

e ri

ght l

ocat

ion

for

new

hom

es c

an ta

ckle

dep

riva

tion

19/

09/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngL

iver

pool

HA

T w

ants

to u

se c

ounc

il w

aiti

ng li

st to

fill

half

em

pty

bloc

ks19

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Old

er p

eopl

e an

d h

omel

essn

ess

– un

able

to s

usta

in m

ortg

age

repa

ymen

ts19

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Hul

l – s

ucce

ss w

ith

prof

essi

onal

wit

ness

es –

evi

ctio

n of

dru

g d

eale

r19

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Kno

ckin

g d

own

esta

tes

coul

d b

e a

bett

er o

ptio

n19

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

EH

A-a

ccre

dit

ed le

ttin

g sc

hem

e br

ings

thou

sand

s of

em

pty

hom

es b

ack

into

use

26/

09/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngE

mpt

y ho

mes

hot

line

to b

e la

unch

ed in

Nov

embe

r26

/09

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Bir

min

gham

MD

C 9

4 m

illio

n re

gene

rati

on s

chem

eO

ct-9

7H

ousi

ngPl

anni

ng s

yste

m is

a la

nd v

alue

lott

ery

(Cha

rmai

ne Y

oung

)01

/10

/97

The

Gua

rdia

nL

eed

s –

vand

alis

ed h

ome

on th

e m

arke

t for

1,0

00 p

ound

s02

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayA

re w

e ab

le to

pro

tect

and

pre

serv

e al

l com

mun

itie

s? (G

ed L

ucas

)02

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

aySe

ttin

g th

e ta

rget

s fo

r ch

ange

-nee

d m

ix o

f are

a ta

rget

ing

and

nat

iona

l pol

icie

s02

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayH

ilary

Arm

stro

ng w

ants

to s

ee a

ran

ge o

f pol

icy

opti

ons

befo

re tu

rnin

g to

the

bulld

ozer

03/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngD

oubt

cas

t on

impa

ct o

f ren

ewal

sch

emes

– A

ssoc

iati

on o

f Lon

don

Gov

ernm

ent

03/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngG

over

nmen

t ple

dge

s to

tack

le s

ocia

l exc

lusi

on th

roug

h ho

usin

g03

/10

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Dep

t. of

Tra

nspo

rt o

wns

hun

dre

ds

of e

mpt

y pr

oper

ties

aw

aiti

ng r

oad

bui

ldin

g d

ecis

ions

03/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

IoH

pri

orit

y su

rvey

– r

egen

erat

ion

of d

epri

ved

est

ates

, rep

airs

, bri

ngin

g em

ptie

s in

to u

se09

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayC

an c

ontr

acts

of m

utua

l sup

port

rec

reat

e co

mm

unit

ies?

(Mic

heal

You

ng a

nd G

erar

d L

emos

)10

/10

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Mer

seys

ide

– ho

w r

esid

ents

, cou

ncil

offi

cers

and

pol

ice

clea

red

dru

g d

eale

rs16

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayTa

sk fo

rce

to im

prov

e ci

ty c

entr

e liv

ing

laun

ched

by

Lee

ds

Cit

y C

ounc

il16

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayC

red

it u

nion

s co

uld

pla

y a

vita

l rol

e in

tack

ling

soci

al e

xclu

sion

16/

10/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Ope

nnes

s by

bot

h L

A a

nd H

A k

ey to

a s

ucce

ssfu

l par

tner

ship

16/

10/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Cou

ncils

to g

et H

A in

form

atio

n16

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayW

arw

ick

– fi

nd it

fill

it s

chem

e, r

ewar

d to

peo

ple

who

rep

ort e

mpt

ies

whi

ch a

re fi

lled

16/

10/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Shel

tere

d h

ousi

ng –

can

’t no

min

ate

or w

on’t

nom

inat

e?17

/10

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Frau

d fa

mili

es to

be

targ

eted

– fa

mili

es w

ho s

wit

ch h

omes

to c

heat

on

bene

fits

17/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngB

rad

ford

Cit

y C

halle

nge

a 10

mill

ion

flop

– c

ould

not

att

ract

wor

king

peo

ple

to li

ve in

est

ate

17/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngK

nock

dow

n si

nk e

stat

es a

nd s

ell l

and

– N

atio

nwid

e B

uild

ing

Soci

ety

17/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

ould

bul

ldoz

ers

beco

me

the

prof

essi

onal

s’ b

est f

rien

d?

(Jul

ian

Dob

son)

17/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngE

RC

F –

dem

and

impo

rtan

t fac

tor

– lin

ked

to g

eogr

aphy

(Jef

f Zit

ron)

23/

10/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Gro

win

g d

eman

d fo

r fu

lly fu

rnis

hed

lett

ings

24/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngE

stat

es h

ave

had

thei

r d

ay (J

. McC

arro

n, G

lasg

ow C

ounc

il’s

hous

ing

chai

r)30

/10

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayL

etti

ngs

Plus

– ta

cklin

g th

e pr

oble

m o

f em

pty

prop

erti

es a

nd h

elps

non

-pri

orit

y ho

mel

ess

31/

10/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngE

din

burg

h –

60%

of o

ffer

s fa

il to

res

ult i

n ne

w te

nanc

ies

Nov

. 97

Hou

sing

Too

man

y em

pty

hom

es in

Sco

tlan

dN

ov. 9

7H

ousi

ngIn

cre

atin

g co

mm

unit

ies,

pla

nner

s ne

ed to

look

bac

kwar

ds

(Dav

id L

unts

)06

/11

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayN

orth

ern

prov

ider

s as

k fo

r gr

eate

r fr

eed

om to

spe

nd fu

nds

on c

omm

unit

y re

gene

rati

on06

/11

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayTa

x br

eaks

urg

ed fo

r d

erel

ict l

and

– C

PRE

06/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Inab

ility

to fu

rnis

h ac

com

mod

atio

n m

ain

reas

on fo

r no

t rem

aini

ng in

LA

hom

es07

/11

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Sund

erla

nd M

DC

pla

ns to

ban

bad

tena

nts

from

its

wai

ting

list

128

The slow death of great cities?D

ate

Sou

rce

Art

icle

07/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngFe

wer

hom

eles

s fa

mili

es p

lace

d in

tem

p. B

&B

by

Not

ting

ham

cou

ncil

07/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngM

assi

ve p

oten

tial

for

conv

erti

ng e

mpt

y of

fice

spa

ce in

to lo

w c

ost h

ousi

ng13

/11

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayH

ousi

ng n

eed

incr

easi

ng in

the

Nor

th (M

arti

n W

ood

)13

/11

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayR

idd

ing

soci

al h

ousi

ng o

f sti

gma

and

reg

ener

atin

g in

ner

citi

es’ k

ey c

halle

nges

13/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Wor

king

on

empt

ies

is g

etti

ng r

esul

ts (B

ob L

awre

nce)

13/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Firs

t evi

ctio

n of

an

intr

oduc

tory

tena

nt h

as h

appe

ned

14/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

omm

unit

y co

nsul

tati

on is

pos

sibl

e (S

teve

Gay

le)

14/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngH

As

mus

t rei

n ba

ck th

eir

dev

elop

men

t asp

irat

ions

(Dav

id C

owan

s, N

orth

Bri

tish

HA

)14

/11

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

HA

s m

ust p

lan

ahea

d to

sta

ve o

ff th

e th

reat

of a

lett

ings

cri

sis

(Sim

on D

ow)

14/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngH

ousi

ng in

vest

men

t a w

aste

of m

oney

unl

ess

we

put y

outh

firs

t (A

ntho

ny M

ayer

)14

/11

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Tena

nts

that

feel

goo

d a

bout

livi

ng in

an

area

will

mak

e an

est

ate

last

(Jul

ian

Dob

son)

14/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngFi

gure

s su

gges

ting

4.4

mill

ion

hom

es q

uest

ione

d b

y L

abou

r M

P D

avid

Dre

w21

/11

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Man

ches

ter

puts

its

fait

h in

you

th fo

r fu

ture

lett

ings

21/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngR

egen

erat

ion

polic

y a

failu

re (D

ET

R)

27/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Tena

nts

back

pla

n to

tran

sfer

a M

anch

este

r C

ity

Cou

ncil

esta

te to

an

HA

27/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Exc

lusi

on s

tud

y sh

ows

wid

enin

g ga

p (D

emos

)27

/11

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayG

over

nmen

t sti

ll co

nsid

erin

g w

hat t

he ta

rget

for

new

hou

sing

will

be

27/

11/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Reg

ener

atio

n sc

hem

e ha

s tu

rned

Sto

ckw

ell P

ark

esta

te in

to a

love

ly p

lace

27/

11/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngSo

me

prop

erti

es n

eed

to b

e d

emol

ishe

d (S

teph

en P

orte

r)D

ec-9

7N

atio

nal H

ousi

ng A

war

ds

Bes

t Fun

din

g So

luti

on –

Em

pty

hom

es s

trat

egy

– L

ond

on B

orou

gh o

f Bre

nt04

/12

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

aySh

elte

r w

arns

of u

nim

agin

able

hom

eles

s cr

isis

in S

cotl

and

05/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngR

ever

se c

uts

or fa

ce h

omel

ess

expl

osio

n –

Shel

ter

Scot

land

11/

12/

97H

ousi

ng T

oday

Priv

ate

sect

or is

lead

ing

the

figh

t aga

inst

em

ptie

s –

Em

pty

Hom

es A

genc

y11

/12

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayG

row

th in

hom

e ow

ners

hip

is li

kely

to s

low

sig

nifi

cant

ly in

Bri

tain

ove

r ne

xt 2

0 ye

ars

12/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngM

idla

nds

lack

s th

e sp

ace

for

5,00

0 ex

tra

hom

es –

Wes

t Mid

land

s re

gion

al fo

rum

12/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngSt

reet

sle

eper

s ne

ed m

ore

than

a r

oof –

Hom

eles

s N

etw

ork

12/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ng8,

900

hom

es in

Eng

land

cre

ated

by

conv

ersi

ons

12/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngG

over

nmen

ts w

ill h

ave

to b

alan

ce b

uild

ing

new

hom

es a

nd c

urbi

ng h

ousi

ng b

enef

it12

/12

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

MPs

to s

crut

inis

e th

e G

over

nmen

t’s a

sses

smen

t of h

ousi

ng n

eed

12/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngH

A d

evel

opm

ent g

rant

s ar

e at

the

righ

t lev

el –

Nat

iona

l Hou

sing

Fed

erat

ion

stud

y19

/12

/97

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Que

stio

n th

e ne

ed to

pro

vid

e 4.

4 m

illio

n ho

mes

19/

12/

97In

sid

e H

ousi

ngL

aws

to d

eal w

ith

empt

y pr

oper

ties

(Sco

tlan

d)

09/

01/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngN

eed

figu

re r

ises

to 5

.5 m

illio

n09

/01

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Ask

wha

t we

are

build

ing,

whe

re a

nd fo

r w

hom

?15

/01

/98

Hac

kney

Gaz

ette

Em

pty

prop

erty

team

get

ting

em

pty

priv

ate

hom

es b

ack

into

use

– H

ackn

ey C

ounc

il20

/01

/98

The

Ind

epen

den

tPr

esco

tt p

ropo

ses

Gre

en B

elt T

ax24

/01

/98

The

Ind

epen

den

tG

over

nmen

t urg

ed to

bui

ld n

ew h

omes

on

brow

nfie

ld s

ites

26/

01/

98T

he T

imes

Few

er h

ouse

s m

ay b

e bu

ilt o

n fa

rmla

ndFe

b. 9

8H

ousi

ngN

umbe

r of

pri

orit

y ho

mel

ess

falls

12/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

New

est

imat

es fu

el c

onfu

sion

12/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Why

BM

W d

rive

rs h

old

the

key

12/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Em

pty

stoc

k13

/02

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Coa

litio

n in

bat

tle

to e

nd V

AT

on

empt

ies

129

Appendix 8D

ate

Sou

rce

Art

icle

19/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Cou

ncils

to o

ffer

hom

es to

pri

vate

sec

tor

tena

nts

19/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Pani

ckin

g pl

anne

rs20

/02

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Em

pty

hom

es s

oar

26/

02/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Rep

ort s

how

s m

ass

urba

n ex

odus

27/

02/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngB

row

nfie

ld ta

rget

fails

to a

dd

ress

soc

ial n

eed

27/

02/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngD

emol

itio

n m

ay p

rove

che

apes

t27

/02

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Neg

ativ

e va

lue

sale

hop

es r

ise

27/

02/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngT

he n

umbe

rs g

ame

– G

ov. s

tati

stic

s on

hou

sing

nee

d b

ased

on

outd

ated

ideo

logy

04/

03/

98D

ET

RL

ocal

aut

hori

ties

urg

ed to

ren

ovat

e an

d c

ut th

e nu

mbe

r of

em

pty

hom

es14

/03

/98

The

Ind

epen

den

tT

he le

sson

from

the

und

ercl

ass

19/

03/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Let

us

brea

k ou

t of t

his

clim

ate

of fe

ar –

cha

ngin

g ne

eds

in h

ousi

ng20

/03

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Mar

ket f

orce

s –

tena

nts

turn

ing

thei

r ba

cks

on s

ocia

l hou

sing

20/

03/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngH

ard

sum

s –

will

new

hom

es b

e af

ford

able

?20

/03

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Off

ice

polit

ics

– em

pty

hom

es a

nd o

ffic

es a

re v

ital

in m

eeti

ng fu

ture

hou

sing

dem

and

26/

03/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Pres

cott

’s n

ew b

uild

pla

n la

cks

ambi

tion

26/

03/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Car

rot f

or w

ell-

beha

ved

tena

nts

27/

03/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngPr

essu

re to

per

form

– e

mpt

y ho

mes

are

bec

omin

g a

seri

ous

prob

lem

for

soci

al la

ndlo

rds

02/

04/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Lon

e pa

rent

s go

pri

vate

03/

04/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

allin

g ti

me

on c

rim

e –

coun

cils

giv

en n

ew d

utie

s to

figh

t ant

i-so

cial

beh

avio

ur03

/04

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Flat

s st

ay e

mpt

y as

tena

nts

pick

and

cho

ose

09/

04/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngA

cha

nce

that

we

mus

t tak

e –

hous

ing

prof

essi

onal

s in

flue

ncin

g th

e ag

end

a17

/04

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Gov

ernm

ent p

lans

for

mor

e af

ford

able

hom

es23

/04

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayH

ousi

ng’s

was

ted

yea

rs –

cas

h sh

ould

not

be

inve

sted

in n

o ho

pe a

reas

23/

04/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Plea

s fo

r th

e ex

tens

ion

of c

hild

cur

few

sch

emes

24/

04/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngN

o-ho

pe h

omes

to g

o30

/04

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayE

mpt

y pr

oper

ty r

ate

to e

ncou

rage

land

lord

s11

/05

/98

DE

TR

pre

ss n

otic

eB

ring

ing

empt

y bu

ildin

gs b

ack

into

use

is a

t the

hea

rt o

f the

Gov

ernm

ent’s

app

roac

h14

/05

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayC

rim

e, u

nem

ploy

men

t, la

ck o

f fac

iliti

es a

re to

p of

peo

ple’

s ag

end

a15

/05

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Don

’t re

peat

the

mis

take

s of

the

past

(let

ter)

(Dav

e B

row

n)21

/05

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayR

ural

Hou

sing

Tru

st b

uild

ing

bala

nced

com

mun

itie

s (l

ette

r) (P

atri

cia

Phip

ps)

21/

05/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Wro

ng to

sto

p in

vest

ing

in n

ew h

omes

in th

e N

orth

Eas

t (le

tter

) (A

ndre

a Ti

tter

ingt

on)

21/

05/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Rev

olut

ioni

sing

hou

sing

str

ateg

y22

/05

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Peop

le d

o no

t wan

t to

live

in h

omes

that

are

vis

ually

iden

tifi

able

as

soci

al h

ousi

ng22

/05

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Nor

th n

eed

s ne

w h

omes

(let

ter)

(And

rea

Titt

erin

gton

)29

/05

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Don

’t ca

st th

e N

orth

Eas

t ad

rift

(let

ter)

(Dav

id B

utle

r)Ju

n. 9

8H

ousi

ngH

ow h

igh

self

-est

eem

can

be

retu

rned

to s

ocia

l hou

sing

Jun.

98

Hou

sing

Publ

ic r

elat

ions

and

hou

sing

Jun.

98

Hou

sing

Mor

e pe

ople

bei

ng m

argi

nalis

ed b

y be

ing

excl

uded

from

soc

ial h

ousi

ngJu

n. 9

8T

he G

uard

ian

Pare

nts

plac

e te

araw

ays

in c

are

to a

void

evi

ctio

n04

/06

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayTa

cklin

g th

e ne

eds

of y

oung

peo

ple

on h

ousi

ng e

stat

es04

/06

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayH

ousi

ng s

taff

join

pol

ice

dru

g te

am05

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Exp

erts

hid

e ab

and

onm

ent o

f hou

ses

11/

06/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Wit

ness

es s

till

not s

afe

130

The slow death of great cities?D

ate

Sou

rce

Art

icle

11/

06/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Tena

nt b

ans

crea

te s

ocia

l exc

lusi

on12

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Sund

erla

nd M

DC

rej

ects

acc

usat

ions

that

its

get-

toug

h po

licy

has

put y

oung

peo

ple

in c

are

12/

06/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngSh

elte

r cl

aim

s co

unci

ls a

buse

exc

lusi

on p

ower

s12

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Man

ches

ter

reth

inks

lim

it o

n re

pair

s fo

r nu

isan

ce te

nant

s26

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Ass

ocia

tion

s fa

ce e

nd o

f pri

vate

cas

h26

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Unw

ante

d h

omes

don

’t ju

stif

y cu

ts26

/06

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Task

forc

e sh

ocke

d b

y d

read

ful p

it h

omes

26/

06/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngSu

perc

aret

aker

s to

the

resc

ue02

/07

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayD

ownt

urn

in d

eman

d02

/07

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayFo

yers

hav

e be

en b

uilt

in th

e w

rong

pla

ces

17/

07/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngW

hy a

re lo

cal a

utho

rity

hom

es s

o un

des

irab

le?

17/

07/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngM

oD’s

em

pty

hom

es23

/07

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayN

o ea

sy a

nsw

ers

for

low

dem

and

nor

ther

n es

tate

s23

/07

/97

Hou

sing

Tod

ayA

s sa

fe a

s ho

uses

– s

ecur

ity

in O

ldha

m24

/07

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

New

chi

efs

to fi

ght d

isor

der

24/

07/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

ounc

ils h

it b

y ab

and

onm

ent

30/

07/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Take

a m

ore

bala

nced

look

at i

ssue

s fa

cing

the

Nor

th30

/07

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayR

esha

pe h

igh

stre

ets

befo

re it

’s to

o la

te30

/07

/98

Hou

sing

Tod

ayN

eigh

bour

hood

s fo

r ri

cher

and

for

poor

er31

/07

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Cha

lleng

e on

em

ptie

sJu

l./A

ug. 9

8H

ousi

ngSi

n bi

n cr

eate

s m

odel

cit

izen

s –

Dun

dee

fam

ilies

pro

ject

03/

08/

98T

he G

uard

ian

Bill

ions

was

ted

on

unw

ante

d h

omes

14/

08/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngSa

nctu

ary

trie

s co

mm

erci

al a

ppro

ach

to ta

ckle

voi

ds

27/

08/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Com

men

t on

MoD

hom

es10

/09

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Les

sons

from

the

lett

ing

agen

ts –

ben

efit

s of

pri

vate

land

lord

s11

/09

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Gat

eshe

ad d

eser

ves

appl

ause

for

veto

ing

new

hom

es –

ed

itor

ial

11/

09/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngH

ousi

ng s

taff

igno

red

by

soci

al s

ervi

ces

11/

09/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngG

ates

head

hal

ts b

uild

ing

18/

09/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngC

onve

rtin

g co

mm

erci

al b

uild

ings

to r

esid

enti

al u

se is

slo

win

g d

own

in L

ond

on19

/09

/98

The

Eco

nom

ist

Cou

ncils

that

can

not f

ind

tena

nts

01/

10/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Aff

ord

able

hom

es m

ust b

e gi

ven

high

er p

rior

ity

01/

10/

98H

ousi

ng T

oday

Soci

al h

ousi

ng b

ecom

ing

a gr

eate

r ri

sk to

lend

ers

02/

10/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngN

ew s

chem

e co

uld

be

a ke

y to

unl

ock

the

pote

ntia

l of e

mpt

y ho

mes

02/

10/

98In

sid

e H

ousi

ngR

esid

ents

trea

ting

cou

ncil

hous

ing

as a

sho

rt te

rm o

ptio

n23

/10

/98

Insi

de

Hou

sing

Gla

sgow

Cit

y C

ounc

il lo

okin

g to

a tr

ust t

o so

lve

its

prob

lem

s02

/12

/98

The

Gua

rdia

nPr

esco

tt in

cla

sh o

ver

new

hom

e ta

x

131

The figures for empty property raise someimportant questions. The fall between 1990 and1997 does not correspond with the evidence atneighbourhood level. It may be partly explainedby large regeneration schemes which removeunpopular properties from normal managementwhile being ‘regenerated’ or awaiting action. Itmay also be that the government’s strictmonitoring of performance indicatorsencourages local authorities to class emptyproperties as ‘awaiting major repair/renewal’rather than as ‘void’. Better monitoring of voidsand more proactive marketing has also helped.Both cities report chronic low demand for muchof their stock.

Appendix 9Local authority stock size, number of difficult to let units,

empties, demolitions for Manchester and Newcastle

Manchester Newcastle1990 1997 1990 1997

Council stock 93,475 78,929 43,678 38,196Difficult to let property 14,804 (1991) 10,750 (1996) 2,810 (1991) 5,624 (1996)Empty property 5,574 2,582 2,473 1,674% of LA stock empty 6.0 3.3 5.7 4.4% empty private property 4.7 6.6 6.2 5.8

Amount of the LA stock demolished 1,791 1,644between 1991 and 1998

% of 1991 stock demolished1 2 4

Volume of empty council stock in 1998 4,744 (6%) 1,774 (4.8%) (November) (October)

Source: Annual HIP returns from DETR, Newcastle and Manchester Housing Departments.

1 This figure does not include all regeneration-driven demolitions.

anne power and katharine mumford - jrf · anne power and katharine mumford. the joseph rowntree...

Documents